Skip to main content

Full text of "A dictionary of the Bible; dealing with its language, literature, and contents, including the Biblical theology"

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2009 with funding from 

Ontario Council of University Libraries 



Dictionary of the Bible 




Dictionary of the Bible 







JOHlf A. SELBii:., M.A. 


A. B. DAYIDSOX, D.D., LL.D. S. R DRIVER, D.D., Lirr.D. 


H. B. SWETE, D.D., Lrrr.D. 



Edinburgh: T. & T. CLARK, 38 George Street 

New York: CHARLES SCRIBXER'S SONS, 153-157 Fifth Avenue 



[The Rights of Translation and of lieproduction are Beserveil.] 



' Give heed to . . . teaching.' Perhaps the Church of Christ has never given 
sufficient heed to teaching since the earliest and happiest daya In our own day 
the importance of teaching, or, as we sometimes call it, expository preaching, has 
been pressed home through causes that are various yet never accidental ; and it is 
probable that in the near future more heed will be given by the Church to teaching 
than has ever been given before. 

As a contribution towards the furnishing of the Churcli for that great work, 
this DiCTiONAEY OF THE BiBLE is published. It is a Dictionary of the Old and Xew 
Testaments, together with the Old Testament Apocrypha, according to the Authorized 
and Ee\'ised English Yei-sions, and with constant reference to the original tongues. 
Every efibrt has been used to make the information it contains reasonably full, 
trustworthy, and accessible. 

As to fulness. In a Dictionary of the Bible one expects that the words 
occurring in the Bible, and which do not explain themselves, will receive some 
explanation. The present Dictionary more nearly meets that expectation than any 
Dictionary that has hitherto been published. Articles have been written on the 
names of all Persons and Places, on the Antiquities and Archaeology of the Bible, 
on its Ethnology, Geology, and Xatural History, on Biblical Theology and Ethic, and 
even on the obsolete or archaic words occurring in the English Versions. The 
greater number of the articles are of small compass, for care has been exercised to 
exclude vague generalities as well as unaccepted idiosyncrasies ; but there are many 
articles which deal with important and difficult subjects, and extend to considerable 
length. Such, for example, and to mention only one, is the article in the first 
volume on the Chronology of the Xew Testament. 

As to trustworthiness. The names of the authors are appended to their articles, 
except where the article is very brief and of minor importance ; and these names are 
the best sfuarantee that the work mav be rehed on. So far as could be ascertained, 
those authors were chosen for the various subjects who had made a special study of 
that subject, and might be able to speak with authority upon it. Tlien, in addition 
to the work of the Editor and Ms Assistant, every sheet has passed through the 
hands of the three distinguished scholars whose names are found on the title-page. 
These scholars are not responsible for errors of any kind, if such should be dis- 


covered in the Dictionary, but the time and care they have spent upon it may be 
tiikeii as a good assurance that the work as a whole is reliable and authoritative. 

As to accessibility. While all the articles have been written expressly for 
this work, so they have been arranged under the headings one would most naturally 
turn to. In a very few cases it has been found necessary to group allied subjects 
together. But even then, the careful system of black-lettering and cross-reference 
adopted, should enable the reader to find the subject wanted without delay. And so 
important has it seemed to the Editor that each subject should be found under its 
own natural title, that he has allowed a little repetition here and there (though not 
in identical terms) rather than distress the reader by sending him from one article 
to another in search of the information he desires. The Proper Names will be found 
under the spelling adopted in the Eevised Version, and in a few very familiar 
instances the spelling of the Authorized Version is also given, with a cross-reference 
to the other. On the Proper Names generally, and particularly on the very difficult 
and unsettled questions of their derivation, reference may be made to the article 
Names (Proper), which will be found in the third volume. The Hebrew, and (where 
it seemed to be of consequence for the identification of the name) the Greek of the 
Septuagint, have been given for all proper and many common names. It was found 
impracticable to record all the variety of spelling discovered in different manuscripts 
of the Septuagint ; and it was considered unnecessary, in view of the great Edition 
now in preparation in Cambridge, and the Concordance of Proper Names about to be 
published at the Clarendon Press. The Abbreviations, considering the size and scope 
of the work, will be seen to be few and easily mastered. A list of them, together 
with a simple and uniform scheme of transliterating Hebrew and Arabic words, will 
be found on the following pages. The Maps have been specially prepared for this 
work by Mr. J. G. Bartholomew, F.RG.S. The Illustrations (the drawings for which 
have been chiefly made in Syria by the Rev. G. M. Mackie, M.A.) are confined to 
subjects which cannot be easily understood witliout their aid. 

The Editor has pleasure in recording his thanks to many friends and willing 
fellow-workers, including the authors of the various articles. In especial, after those 
whose names are given on the title-page, he desii-es to thank the Eev. W. Sanday, 
D.D., LL.D., Lady Margaret Professor of Divmity in the University of Oxford, who has 
read many of the articles and given valuable assistance in other ways, and whose 
name might have appeared on the title-page, had not illness prevented him for some 
time from carrymg out his intention of reading the proof-sheets as they were ready ; 
next, his own early teacher, Dr. Donald Shearer, who voluntarily undertook, and 
has most conscientiously carried out, the verification of the passages of Scripture ; 
also Professor Mahafi-'Y of Dublin, who kindly read some articles in proof; Professor 
Ryle of Cambridge; Professor Salmond of Aberdeen; Principal Stewart of St. 
Andrews; and Principal Faibbairn and Mr. J. Vernon Bartlet, M.A. of Mansfield 
College, Oxford. 

•,• Messrs. Charles Scribner'a Sons, New ^,,ik. liave the sole right of publication of this 
DiCTTOWnv OF THE RliU.K ill the T'nitr.l States iin.l Canada. 







b t_j 

b n 

t ^ 

& 3 

th c>? 

d 1 

J ^ 

h n 

u r 

tt, w T 

kh ^ 


d J 

h n 

dh J 

t ID 


i.y •> 


k 3 

S (J*s 


sh j_^i 

m 72 

^ U^ 

n : 

4 u- 

8 D 

t 1, 


? li 

P D 


? 2 

gli ^ 

k p 

f uJ 

r ") 

k J 

s, sh ^ \b 

k CJ 

t n 

1 J 

m (♦ 

n ii.1 

h * 

U, W J 

i»y fcrf 




I. General 

Alex. = Alexandrian. 

Apoe. = ApocalypHC. 

Apocr. = Apocrypha. 

Aq. =Aquila. 

Arab. = Arabic. 

Aram. = Aramaic. 

Assyr. = A-ssyrian- 

Bab. = Babylonian. 

c. = circa, about. 

Can. =Canaanite. 

cf. — Compare. 

ct. = Contrast. 

D = Deuterononiist. 

E = ElokUt. 

edd. = Editions or Editors. 

Egyp. =E<?vptian. 

Eng. = English. 

Etn. = Ethiopic, 

f. =and following or page ; as Ac 10*"- 

ff. =and following verses or pages ; as Mt 1 1^"- 

Gr. = Greek. 

H=Law of Holiness. 

Heb. = Hebrew. 

Hel. = Hellenistic. 

Hex. = Hexateuch. 

Isr. = Israelite. 


J *= Jehovah. 

Jems. = Jenisalem. 

Jos. =Jo.sephu8. 

LXX = Septuagint. 

MSS = Manu-scripts. 

MT = Massoretic Text. 

n. =note. 

NT = New Testament. 

Onk. = Onkelos. 

0T = Old Testament. 

P= Priestly Narrative. 

Pal. = Palestine, Palestinian. 

Pent. = Pentateuch. 

Pers. = Persian. 

Phil. = Philistine. 

Phoen. = Phcjenician. 

Pr. Bk. = Prayer Book. 

R = Redactor. 

Rom. = Roman. 

Sam. = Samaritan. 

Sem. = Semitic. 

Sept. = Se])tiiagint. 

Sin. =:Sinaitic. 

Symm. = Symmachus. 

SjT. = SjTiac. 

Talm. = Talmud. 

Targ. =Targum. 

Theod. =Theodotion. 

TR = Textus Receptus. 

tr. = translate or translation. 

VSS = Versions. 

Vul<r.= Vulgate. 

WH = Westcott and Hort's text. 

II. Books op the Bible 

Old Testament. 

On = Genesis. 

Ex = Exodus. 

Lv = Leviticus. 


IH = Deuti-ronomy. 

Jo4=: Joshua. 

Jg=: Judges. 

Ru = Ruth. 

I S, 2 8=1 and 2 Samuel. 

1 K, 2 K = l and 2 Kings. 

1 Ch, 2 Ch = 1 and 2 

Ezr = Ezra. 
Xeh -N<>h(Mniah. 
Eist=B Esther. 

P»= PsaliiiM. 
Ec = Ecclesiastes. 

I E«, 2 Eh= I and 2 To^^Tobit. 
Estlra.". Jth = Judith. 

Ca= Canticles. 
Is = Isaiah. 
Jer = Jeremiah.' 
La = Lamentations. 
Ezk = Ezckiel. 
Dn = Daniel. 
Am = Amos. 
Ob = ()badiah. 
Jon = Jonah. 
Mic = Micah. 
Nah = Nahum. 
Hab = HalMikkuk. 
Zeph = Zephaniah. 
Hag = Haggai. 
Zec = Ze<-Ii:iriah. 
Mal = Malachi. 

Ad. Est = Additions to Sus = Susanna. 

Wis = Wisdom. 
Sir = Sirach or Ecclesi- 

Bar = liaruch. 
Three = Song of ihr 

Three Children. 

Bel = Bel and the 

Pr. Man = Prayer of 

1 Mac, 2 Mac=:I and 2 

Aew Tc.ttament. 

Mt = Matthew. 

Mk = Mark. 

Lk = Luke. 

Jn = John. 

Ac = Acts. 

Ro= Romans. 

1 Co, 2 Co = 1 and 2 

Gal = (talat inns. 
Eph =: Eplu'si.ins. 
Pli = PhilippiunH. 
Col = Colossians. 

1 Th, 2 Th = 1 and 2 

1 Ti, 2 Ti = 1 and 2 

Tit = Titus. 
Philem = Philemon. 
He = Hebrews. 
Ja = James. 

1 P, 2P=1 and J Peter. 
1 Jn, 2 Jn, .S Jn = l, 2, 

and 3 John. 
Rev = Revelation. 



III. English Versions 

Wye. =Wyclifs Bible (XT c. 1380, OT c. 1382, 

Purvev's Revision c. 1388). 
Tind. = Tin(iale'8 XT 1526 and 15^, Pent. 1530. 
Cov. = Coverdale's Bible 1535. 
Matt, or Rog. = Matthew's (i.e. prob. Rogers') 

Bible 1537. 
Cran. or Great =Cranmer'8 'Great' Bible 1539. 
Tav.=TaTemer's Bible 1539. 
Gen. = Geneva XT 1557, Bible 1560. 

Bish.=Bishop.s' Bible 1568. 
Tom.=Tomson's XT 1576. 
Rhem. = Rhemish XT 1582. 
Don. =Douajr OT 1609. 
AV=Anthorized Version 1611. 
AVm = Authorized Version margin. 
RV = Revised Version XT 1881, OT 
RVni = Revised Version margin. 
EV=Auth. and Rev. Versions. 


IV. Fob the Literature 

.45^7'= Ancient Hebrew Tradition. 

.^r=Altes Testament. 

£Z=BanipTon Lecture. 

.B3/= British Museum. 

BRP — Biblical Researches in Palestine. 

CIG = Corpus Inscriptionum Gnecamin. 

CIL = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. 

C/5= Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. 

COr= Cuneiform Inscriptions and the OT. 

Z)jB= Dictionary of the Bible. 

GGA = Gottingische Gelehri:e Anzeigen, 

G VI — Geschichte des Volkes Israel. 

HC'iI= Higher Criticism and the Monuments. 

fi^£'=Historia Ecclesiastica. 

i?^t/P= History of the Jewish People. 

fi^G^'i^: Historical Geog. of Holy Lauid. 

HI= History of Israel. 

HPM= Historj-, Prophecy, and the Monuments. 

JDTh = Jahrbiicher fiir deutsehe Theologie. 

t/^.4.S= Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. 

JQR=5e\y]s\i Quarterly Review. 

KAT=T>ie KeUinschriften und das Alte Test. 

ZOr=Introd. to the Literature of the Old Test. 

ON— Otium Xorvicense. 

Orj^C= The Old Test, in the Jewish Church. 

P^F= Palestine Exploration Fund. 
PEFSt = Quarterly Statement of the same. 
PSBA = Proceedings of the Society of Biblical 

P-ffZ^=Real-Encyclopadie fiir protest. Theologie 

xxnd Kirche. 
^PjB = Queen's Printers' Bible. 
P-E'./= Revue des Etudes Juives. 
PP= Records of the Past. 
^•S= Religion of the Semites. 
.S:^Or= Sacred Books of Old Test. 
5jfir=Studien und Kritiken. 
5IFP= Memoirs of the Survey of Western 

ThL or ThLZ —Theol. Literaturzeitung. 
TAr^TheoL Tijdschrift. 

TSBA = Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Archaeology. 
IF^/= Western Asiatic Inscriptions. 
ZAW OT Z.irn'=Zeitschrift fiir die Alttest. 

ZDMG = Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen- 

liindischen Gresellschaft. 
ZZ>P r= Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina- 

Z^II'^ Zeitschrift fiir kirchliche Wissen-schait. 

A small superior number designates the particular edition of the work referred to, as KAT^, LOT^. 


Palestine . 

Babylonia, Assyria, etc. 
Sinai Peninsula and Canaan 

Tllu^tkating the EXUDIS) 

facing TITLE 
,, page 176 
,- „ 802 


Rev. "Walter F. Adeney, M.A., Professor of 
New Testament Exegesis in the New CJolIege, 

Ven. A. S. Aglex, M.A., D.D., Archdeacon of 
St. Andrews. 

Rev. WiLLOUGHBY C. Allex, M.A., Chaplain, 
Fellow, and Lecturer in Theology and Hebrew, 
Exeter College, Oxford. 

Rev. JoHX S. Baxks, Professor of Systematic 
Theology in the Headingley CoUege, Leeds. 

Rev. W. E. Barnes, M.A., D.D., Fellow of Peter- 
house, Cambridge. 

James Verxox Bartlet, M.A., Tutor in Mans- 
field College, Oxford. 

Rev. L. W. Battex, M.A., Ph.D., Professor of 
Hebrew, Protestant Episcopal Divinity School, 

Rev. Willis Judson Beecher, D.D., Professor 
of Hebrew Language and Literature in Auburn 
Theological Seminary, N.Y. 

Rev. Joseph Agar Beet, D.D., Professor of 
Systematic Theology in the Richmond Theo- 
logical CoUege. 

P. V. M. Bexecke, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of 
Magdalen College, Oxford. 

Rev. W. H. Bexxett, M.A., Professor of Old 
Testament Exegesis in Hackney and New 
Colleges, London ; sometime Fellow of St. 
John's College, Cambridge. 

Rev. Edward Ru.s.sell Berxard, M.A., Chan- 
cellor and Canon of Salisbury ; formerly Fellow 
of Magdalen College, Oxford. 

Rev. JoHK Hexry Bernard, D.D., Fellow of 
Trinity College, and Archbishop King's 
Lecturer in Di\"inity in the University of 

Rev. J. F. Bethuxe-Baker, M.A., Fellow and 
Dean of Pembroke College, Cambridge. 

Frederick J. Bliss, B.A., Ph.D., of the Palestine 
Exploration Fund in Jerusalem. 

Rev. Robert Masson Boyd, M.A., Glenbervie, 

Rev. Fraxcis Browx, M.A., D.D., Profes-sor of 
Hebrew and Cognate Languages in Union 
Theological Seminary, New York. 

Rev. W. Adams Brown, M.A.. D.D., Professor 
of Systematic Theology in L'nion Theological 
Seminary, New York. 

F. Crawford BiTRKrrT, M.A., Trinity College, 

Rev. Charles Fox Bitrney, M.A., Lecturer in 
Hebrew, and Fellow of St. John Baptist's Col- 
lege, Oxford. 

Rev. Wixfrid O. Burrows, M.A., Principal of 
Leeds Clergy School. 

Rev. George G. Cameron, M.A., D.D., Professor 
of Hebrew in the Free Church CoUege, 

The late Rev. James S. Caxdlish, M.A., D.D., 
Professor of Systematic Theology in the Free 
Church College, Glasgow. 

Rev. WiLLl.\M Carslaw, M.A., M.D., of the 
Lebanon Schools, Beyrout, Syria. 

Rev. Arthlti Thomas Chapmax, M.A., FeUow, 
Tutor, and Hebrew Lecturer, Emmanuel 
College, Cambridge. 

Rev. Robert Henry Charles, M.A., of Trinity 
College, Dublin, and Exeter CoUege, Oxford. 

Rev. Frederic Henry Chase, M. A., D.D., FeUow 
and Lecturer in Theology, Christ's College, 
and Principal of the Clergy Scliool, Cambridge. 

Lieut. -Col. Claude Regnier Conder, RE., 
LL.D., M.R.A.S. 

Fred. C. Conybeare, M. A., late FeUow of Uni- 
versity College, Oxford. 

Rev. G. A. Cooke, M.A., FeUow of Magdalen 
CoUege, Oxford, and Rector of Beaconsfield, 

Rev. Henry Cowan, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Church History in the University of Aberdeen. 

"W. E. Crum, M.A., of the Egypt Exploration 

Rev. Edward L. Curtis, D.D., Professor ol 
Hebrew in Yale University, New Haven. 

Rev. Andrew Bruce Davidson, D.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Hebrew in the New CoUege, 

Rev. T. Witton Davies, B.A., Ph.D., M.R.A.S., 
Professor of Biblical Literature in the Midland 
Baptist CoUege, Nottingham. 

Rev. W. T. Davison, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Old Testament Exegesis in the Handsworth 
Theological CoUege, Birmingham. 

Rev. James Denney, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Systematic Theology in the Free Churcli 
CoUege, Glasgow. 



i;. \ WiJ.iJAM r. DiCKSO.v, D.I).. LL.D., Emeritus 
I'rofeHHor of Divinity in the University of 


Ki\. Sami'KI, lldLLKs DitlVKR, D.D., Canon of 
(.'hristC'hurcii, and Itejjiun l*rofe««orof Hebrew 
in tiie University of Oxford. 

!;■ \ . William K. Eddy, of the American Mission, 
Sidon, Syria. 

i;. \ William Ewixo, M.A., Birmingham, for- 
iiu'rly of Tilierias, Palestine. 

l; ^ Ckokoe Ferkiks, M.A., D.D., Cluny, Aber- 

; iiii^liiri' 

1^ KVKST Gakvie, M.A.. i; I'.. Mon- 

>;<.-. , i.x.t.. liner in Iliblical Laii^ . i • - in tlx' 
Congregational Hall, P^dinburgh. 

Rev. Sydxkv ('. C wroiM). M.A.. K\.!.r ('nllru.\ 

Uev. .John (Jiiiit, M.A., D.D., I'lulesrsoi ol New 
Testament Exegesis in the Presbyterian Col- 
lege, Ix)ndon. 

G. Buchanan Gray, M.A., Lecturer in Mansfield 
College, Oxford. 

1 ^ Alexander Grieve, M.A., Ph.D., Forfar. 

of tiie British Museum ; SuiJerintendont of the 
Arclueologieal Survey of Egypt. 

Rev. Hexky Melvill Gwatkin, M.A., D.D., 
Fellow of Emm.annel College, and Dixie Pro- 
fessor of Ecclesiastical History in the Universitj' 
of Cambridge. 

Rev. S. T. GwiLLlAM. I . i; (i.S., Hjmii>ton Povle 

1N.,.f,.,-,- l.'...,.|i„,.. ^ 

I ; ; I . I : \ 1 TKRSBV, M. A. , Balliol 

» ■■ ■xiuiil; \icar of Mosslev Hill, 


i; '. . Ki.wiN Klmer Harding, M.A., Principal of 
Suint Aidan's Theological College, Birkenhead. 

licv. J. Rendkl Harris, M.A., D.Litt., Fellow 
and Lilmiriau of Clare College, and Lecturer 
in Pal.Togrivphy in the University of Cam- 

Utv. Arthur Cayley Headlam, M.A., B.D., 
Rector of Wdwyn, Herts; formerly Fellow 
of All Souls College, Oxford. 

i:.v. Archibald Henderson, M.A., DD 

Crieff. ■ ■' 

K. M. HoLMF^, F.L.S., Curator of the Museum of 

the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. 
FltiTZ HoMMEL. Ph.D., LL.D., Ord. Professor of 

S.-imftc F.:in,i:nn.irc. in tlir I'liivcrsity of 

I.i'WAiiii 11i;m„ M.A., LL.D., K.R.S.. F.R.fJS 
lite Director of the Geological Smv, v of 
1 rt-land, and Professor of Geology ia tljc lioyal 
< ollege of Science, Dublin. 

i:\. MoNT.^GUE Rhodes Jamks, M.A Litt D 
j-fllow and Dean of King's College, and 
Director of the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cam- 

Frank Byron Jevons, M.A., Litt.D., Principal 

of Bishop Hattield's Hall, Durham. 
Rev. .Vrihirali) R. S. Kennedy, M.A DD 

Profeswr of Hebrew and Semitic I^aiiguages 

in the University of E<linl)urgh. 
Rev John Houoiiton Kennedy, M A D D 

Ajwistant I^turer in the Divinity School of 

Diiirlm T niversity. 

Rev. Thomas 

B. Kili'Atimi k, MA. 

i;. I)., 

Rev. John Laidlaw, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Systematic Theology in the New College, 

Rev. Walter Lock, M.A., D.D., Fellow of 
Magdalen and Warden of Keble Colleges, 
and Dean Ireland's Professor of New Testa- 
ment Exegesis in the University of Oxford. 

Alexander Macalister, LL.D,, M.D., F.R.S., 
F.S.A,, Fellow of St. John's College, and 
Professor of Anatomy in the University of 

Rev. J. A. M'Clymont, M.A., D.D., Aberdeen. 

i:.v. Ceoroe M. Mackie, M.A., Chaplain to the 

(Jliurcb of Scotland at Beyrout, Syria. 
\lr\. .loilV MaCI'IIKKSOX, M.A., Findiioin, 


D. S. ^Lvkgoliouth, M.A., Fellow of New Col- 
lege, and Laudian I'rofessor of Arabic in the 
University of Oxford. 

Rev. John Turner Marshall, M.A., Professor 
of Classics in the Baptist College, Man- 

John Massie, M.A., Yates Professor of New 
Testament Exegesis in Manslield College, 
Oxford ; formerly Scholar of St. John's Col- 
lege, Cambridge. 

Joseph Bickersteth Mayor, M.A., Litt.D., 
Emeritus Professor of King's College, London, 
and Hon. Fellow of St. John's College, Cam- 

Rev. Selah Merrill, D.D., LL.D., lately U.S. 
Consul at Jerusalem. 

Rev. James Millar, M.A.. B.D., New Cumnock. 

Rev. George Milligan, M.A., IJ.J)., Ca2)iuli, 

Rev. William Morgan, M.A., Tarbolton. 

Rev. R. Waddy Moss, Professor of (■la»i(> in the 
Didsbury College, Manchester. 

Rev. William Muir, M.A., B.D., B.L., Blair- 

Rev. J. O. F. Murray, M.A., Fellow of Emmanuel 
College, Cambridge. 

John L. Myres, M.A., Student of Christ Church, 

Rev. Thomas Nicol, M.A., D.D., Edinburgh. 

Rev. James Orr, M.A., D.D., Profe.'^sor of Church 

History in the United I'lr^l.yi, rian Hall, 


John Waugh Paterson, B.Sc, Ph.D., Lecturer 
on Agricultural Chemistry in the Gla.sgow 
and West of Scotland Teclmical Collide. 

Rev. William P. Paterson, .M.A., !).!)., i'l... 
fessor of Systematic Theology in the Uni- 
versity of Aberdeen. 

Rev. James Patrick, M. A., B.D., B.Sc, Examiner 
for Deforces in Divinity in the University of 
St. Andrews. 

Rev. John Patrick, M.A., D.D., E<linl.ur-li. 

Arthur S. Peake, M.A., Professor in the Primi- 
tive Methodist College, Manchester, and 
Lecturer in Lancashire Indei>endent College ; 
sometime Fellow of Merton and Lecturer in 
Mansfield Colleges, Oxford. 

W. Flinders Petrie, M.A., D.C.L., Professor of 
Egyptology in University College, London. 

Rev. George M. Philps, M.A., B.D., Forfar. 


I. A. Pinches, Sippar House, London. 


the Ejiyptian and Assyrian Department in the 
British Museum. 

Rev. Alfred Plummer, M.A., D.D., Master of 
University College, Durham. 

Rev. Frank C. Porter, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Biblical Theology in Yale University, New 

Rev. Harvey Porter, B.A., Ph.D., Professor in 
the American College, Beyrout, SjTia. 

Rev. George Post, M.D., F.L.S., Professor in 
' the American College, Beyrout. 

Rev. John Poucher, M.A., D.D., Professor in 
De Pauw University, Ind. 

Rev. Ira M. Price, M.A., Ph.D., Assistant 
Professor of Semitic Philology- in the Uni- 
versity of Chicago. 

Rev. Cyril Henry Prichard, M.A., late Classical 
Scholar of Magdalen College, Cambridge. 

Rev. George T. Purves, Ph.D., D.D., Professor 
of New Testament Literature and Exegesis 
in Princeton Theological Seminaiy, New 

William M. Ramsay, M.A., LL.D., D.C.L., 

Professor of Humanity in the University of 
Aberdeen, and formerly Fellow of Exeter and 
Lincoln Colleges, Oxford. 

Rev. Henry A. Redpath, M.A., Vicar of Spars- 
holt with Kingstone Lisle, Berks. 

The late Eev. Hp:xry Robert Reynolds, D.D., 
Principal of Cheshunt College, Herts. 

Rev. Archibald Robertson, M.A., D.D., Prin- 
cipal of King's College, London. 

Rev. Forbes Robinson, M.A., Fellow, Chaplain, 
and Theological Lecturer in Christ's College, 

Rev. J. Armitage Robinson, M.A., Ph.D., D.D., 
Fellow of Christ's College and Norrisian Pro- 
fessor of Divinity in the University of Cam- 

Rev. Herbert Edward Ryle, M.A., D.D., 
President of Queen's College, and Hulsean 
Professor of Divinity in the University of 

Rev. Stewart Dingwall Fordyce Salmond, 
M.A., D.D., F.E.LS., Professor of Systematic 
Theology in the Free Church College, Aber- 

Rev. Archibald Henry Sayce, M.A., LL.D., 
Fellow of Queen's College, and Professor of 
Assyriology in the University of Oxford. 

Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, M.A., College 
Park, London. 

Rev. John A. Selbie, M.A., Maryculter, Kin- 

Rev. John Skinner, M.A., D.D., Professor of 
Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis in the 
Presbyterian College, London. 

Rev. George Adam S.mith, M.A., D.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Hebrew in the Free Church 
College, Glasgow. 

Rev. Vincent Henry Stanton, M.A., D.D., 
Fellow of Trinity College, and Ely Professor 
of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. 

John F. Stenning, M.A., Lecturer in Hebrew and 
Theology, Wadham College, Oxford, 

Rev. Alexander Stewart, M.A., D.D., Prin- 
cipal of St. Mary's College, and Professor of 
Systematic Theology in the University of St. 

Rev. James Strachan, 'SI. A., St. Fei-;^u~. 

Rev. Thomas B. Strong, M.A., .Studeiu ui" ( 'liii.-t 
Church, Oxford. 

Rev. Isaac Taylor, M.A., Litt.D., LL.D., Rector 
of Settrington and Canon of York. 

Rev. John Taylor, M.A., Litt.D., Vicar of 

Henry St. John Thackeray, M.A., Examiner 
in the Education Department, formerly 
Divinity Lecturer in Selwyn College, Cam- 

Rev. G. W. Thatcher, M.A., B.D., Hebrew Tutor 
and Lecturer on Old Testament History and 
Literature in Manstield College, Oxford. 

Rev. Joseph Henry Thayer, M.A., D.D., Bussey 
Professor of New Testament Criticism and 
Interpretation in the Divinity School of Har- 
vard University. 

Cuthbert Hamilton Turner, M.A., Fellow of 
Magdalen College, Oxford. 

Rev. George Walker, M.A., B.D., Callander. 

Rev. Bkx.jamix Breckinridge Warfield, D.D., 
LL.D., Professor of Systematic Theologj' in 
Princeton Theological Seminary, New Jersey. 

Lieut. -General Sir Ch.vrles "Warren, G.C.M.G., 

K.C.B., F.R.S., Royal Engineers. 
Rev. Adam C. Welch, M.A., B.D., Helensburgh. 

Rev. Henry Alcock White, M.A., Tutor in the 
University of Durham ; late Fellow of New 
College, Oxford. 

Rev. Newport J. D. White, M.A., B.D., Assist- 
ant Lecturer in Divinity and Hebrew in the 
University of Dublin. 

Rev. Owen C. Whitehouse, M.A., Principal and 
Professor of Biblical Exegesis and Theology, 
Cheshunt College, Herts. 

Rev. A. LuKYN Williams, M. A., Vicar of Guilden 
^lordeii, late Tyrwhitt and Crosse Scholar of 
the University of Cambridge. 

Major-General Sir- Charles William SXu.^os, 
R.E., K.C.B., K.C.M.G., D.C.L.. LL.D.. 

Rev. Francis Henry Woods, M.A., B.D., Vicar 
of Chalfont St. Peter, Bucks, and late Fellow 
and Theological Lecturer of St. John's Col- 
lege, Oxford. 

Rev. John Wortabet, M.A., M.D., Beyrout, 


=?Sa- _ 



! S 


" -^^-v. 





i i 


-, 1 .1 1 ' 


^2 t 

4 M^ir^fy^: 



.V s- 

A' /' ;/ A' r «»/ «v .V .£ 

:^ '-r- 

iiK '■ ^t 




KW'^ ! 






A. — This letter is used in critical notes on 
the t€xt of OT and NT to denote the Codex 
Alexandrinus, a MS of the Greek Bible written 
apparently in Egypt c. A.D. 450, placed in the 
Horary of the Patriarch of Alexandria in 1098, 
presented by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Con- 
stantinople (formerly of Alexandria), to Charles I. 
in 1628, and now in the British Museum. It con- 
tains the whole Bible except Gn 14"-" i5i-*-i"» 
16«-», 1 K [1 S] 121-^-149, Ps 49(50)«'-79{80)", Mt 
P-25«, Jn e^^-S*-', 2 Co 4i»-12^ The Psalter is intro- 
duced by a letter of Athanasius to Marcellinus, 
the Hypotheses of Eusebius, and various tables ; 
and is concluded by a collection of Canticles from 
OT and NT, and a Christian Morning Hymn. 
Rev is followed by two Epistles of Clement (want- 
ing l'*-*^ 2'^-^), both apparently still in ecclesiastical 
use at the time when this MS. was written. Last 
of all, marked as extra-canonical, came eighteen 
Psalms of Solomon ; but this part has disappeared. 
Its readings in OT can be most readily ascer- 
tained from Professor Swete's edition of the LXX. 
Its NT text was published by Woide in 1786, bv 

B. H. Cowper in 1860, and by E. H. HanseU in a 
parallel text, 1864. The whole MS was published 
m a photographic facsimile by the Curators of the 
British Museum in 1879. J. O. F. Murray. 

K (Aleph), the tirst letter in the Heb. alphabet. 
This symbol in crit. app. denotes the Codex 
Sinaiticus, a MS of the Greek Bible discovered in 
the monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai by 

C. Tischendorf, 1844 and 1859. It was written 
towards the middle or end of the 4th cent. 
Four scribes at least were employed on it. The 
scribe who copied Tobit and Judith wrote also six 
cancel leaves in the NT containing Mt 16^-18" 
2436-26", Mk 14«-Lk 1», 1 Th 2»-o-^, He 4'«-8», 
besides various headlines, titles, subscriptions, 
and section numbers. This scribe Tischendorf 
further identified with the scribe who wrote the 
NT in Codex B, Vaticanus (which see). The MS 
shows marks of revision due to various hands from 
the 4th cent, to the 12th cent. One of these, k=», 
7th cent., declares in a note at the end of 2 Es [Ezr- 
Neh] and at the end of Est, that he had compared 
the MS in these books with a very^ ancient copy 
transcribed by Antoninus the Contessor, and col- 
lated with Origen's Hexapla by the holy martyr 
Pamphilus when in prison at Caesarea. The cor- 
rections introduced by him in these books, though 

VOL. I. — I 

of an Origenic chaiticter, certainly do not embody 
the complete Hexaplaric text. 

There seems to be no clear evidence to show 
either where the MS was written, or how it passed 
into the possession of the monks of St. Catherine. 
While in their possession it fell into decay, and 
long ago the outside sheets were cut up for book- 
binding purposes ; and Tischendorf was convinced 
that the sheets he rescued in 1844 were only wait- 
ing their turn for use in the oven. It is not sur- 
prising, therefore, that the MS is now far from 
complete. It contains portions of Gn 23. 24 and of 
Nu 5. 6. 7 ; 1 Ch 9^-19^^ 2 Es ^""^ [Ezr 9S-Neh], 
Est, To, Jth, 1 Mac, 4 Mac (3 Mac perhaps lost). 
Is, Jer, La 1-2-^, JI, Ob, Jon, Nah, Hab, Zeph, 
Hag, Zee, Mai, Ps, Pr, Ec, Ca, Wis, Sir, Job. 
The NT is complete, and is followed by the Epistle 
of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hennas. 

The text has been published in facsimile type — 
(1) in 1846, ' Cod. Frid.-Aug.,' containing the sheets 
of OT secured in 1844; (2) in 1862, 'Cod. Sin.,' 
containing, besides NT, the rest of OT, mth the 
exception of a few verses (published in an appendix 
in 1867). Tischendorf also published the NT text 
in a handy volume in 1863. The OT readings are 
most easily accessible in Swete's edition of the 
LXX (Cambridge, 1887-95, ed. 2, 1895-8). 

J. O. F. Murray. 

A.— A symbol used in OT criticism by Dillmann 
to signify the Priestly elements of the Hex., more 
usually tnown as P. See Hexateuch. 

F. H. Woods. 

A is frequently used in AV, and sometimes 
retained in RV, in constructions that are now 
obsolete. It is found both as an adj. (or indef. 
art.) and as a prep. 1. -4, as an adj., is a wom- 
down form of the Old English adj. an, 'one.' 
(1) In modem Eng. a is used before a con- 
sonantal sound, an before a vowel sound. In 
the Eng. VSS of the Bible this usage is not 
invariable. See Ax. (2) A is found qualifj-ing 
abstract nouns without affecting their meaning : 
Wis 12^^^ ' thou art of a ftill power' (RV ' perfect in 
power '■) ; 12'* ' to be of a gootl hope ' (RV ' of good 
hope'); 2 Co 10* 'having in a readiness' (RV 
' being in readiness ') ; 2 Mac 13'^ ' commanded 
they should be in a readiness.' Cf. Guylforde, 
Pylgrymage 7 : ' alwaye in a redynesse to set forth 
when they woU.' On the other hand it is sometimes 
omitted where it is required for indiWdualising : 
Sir 39" ' at time convement.' (3) In Lk 9* 'about 



an eight days (RV about eight days) after these 
sayings ' the art. is used as in ' a good many ' ; so 
1 Mac 4" ' there were slain of them upon a three 
thousand men ' (IIV ' about three thousand '). 

2. In other expressions ^ is a prep., being 
a worn-down form of an or on, and stands for 
tiie modern ' at,' ' in,' or ' on.' 2 Cli 2'" ' three 
thousand and six Imndred overseers to set the 
people a work' (UV 'awork'); 1 Co 9^ 'who 
goeth a warfare (ItV 'serveth') any time at his 
own charges?' Jth V 'horsemen . . . and other 
men that were afoot.' Most frequently with a 
verbal noun in 'ing' : 2 Ch 16' 'wherewith Baasha 
was a building' (AV of 1611, later edd. 'was 
building,' liV ' had builded ') ; 1 Es 6* ' Being 
still a building, it is not yet fully ended' ; Lk 8''^ 
'She lay a dying.' The full form an or on re- 
mained side by side with this worn-down form : 
Ac 13*" ' David . . . fell on sleep ' ; Mt 4^" ' He 
was afterward an Imngered ' (RV ' He afterward 
hungered.' ' An hungered ' occurs also Mt 12'- ' 
26»-n- «• **, Mk 22», Lk 6^ and in all these places 
RV leaves it unchanged). 

LmHATCRB.— Besides the necessary edd. of the Eng. Bible, 
Skeat, Etymol. Diet, of the Eng. Laiw.i ; Murray and Bradlev, 
Kiuj. Diet, on Hist. PrineipUt (calleflf the (ktjford Eng. Diet.) ; 
Wliitnev, Century Diet. ; Wright, BibU Word Boolfl ; Michie, 
mUe Words and Phrases ; Mayhew, Select Olotmry of Bible 
Words ; Trench, Select Glossary ; together with the Concord- 
ances to Shakespeare, Milton, etc. ; and the Clarendon Press 
and I*itt Press edd. of the Eng. works of the period. 

J. Hastings. 
AARON (iitrix, LXX 'Kapdiv). — In the narratives 
of the Exodus, Aaron is, after Moses, the most 
jtrominent figure. Often appearing as the colleague 
or rej)resentative of the great leader and lawgiver, 
lie is in particular the priest, and the head of the 
Israelitisii priesthood. We must, however, distin- 

?:uish between our different authorities in the 
*ent., for in the priestly narrative Aaron not 
unnaturally occupies a far more important place 
than in the earlier account of JE. 

In JE, Aaron is first introduced as Moses' 
brother, and with the title of the Levitc, in Ex 
4'* J, where J", sending Moses on his mission to 
the Israelites, appoints him, on account of his 
fluency in speech, to be the sjwkesman of Moses to 
the i)eople (vv. ""*'). Aaron meets his brother in 
the mount of God ; together they return to Egypt 
and assemble the elders of the Israelites, before 
whom Aaron, instructed by Moses, delivers God's 
message and performs the appointed signs. The 
people believe ; but when Moses and Aaron re- 
quest Pharaoh to grant the people temporary 
leave of absence, the king refuses to listen to them 
(Ex 4-6'). In the account of the plagues Aaron 
occupies quite a subordinate place, l>eing the 
silent com[>anion of his brother. It is Moses who 
is sent to Pharaoh and announces the coming 
plagues (Ex 7'*^- 8"^- '""»■ 9"^- ""• [J mainly]— with 
10* contra.«tt 10* ' he turned '). Aaron is merely 
callcil in four times along with Moses to entreat 
for their removal (8»» 9-« 10'«). Indeed it seems 
proWble that the mention of Aaron in these 

{•assages is due, not to the original narrative of J, 
mt to the e<litor who combined J and E ; for in 
each case Moses alone answers, and in his own 
name; in 8** 9" 10'" his departure alone is men- 
tionetl, while in 8'''' it is Moses alone who prays for 
the removal of the frogs. In the history of the 
wanderings the {)a8sages relating to Aaron are for 
the most jMirt derived from E, where indeed Miriam 
is described as the sister of Aaron (15*'). With 
Hur he assists Moses in holding up the rod of God 
to ensure the defeat of Amalek (l?'"'* E), and 
together with the elders he is called to Jethro's 
sacrifice (18'* E). At Sinai, while priests and people 
remain below, Aaron accompanies Moses up the 
mountain (19»* J), together with Nadab, Abihu, 

and seventy elders of Israel (24"- """) ; and when 
Moses with Joshua alone is about to approach 
still nearer to God, Aaron and Hur are temixirarily 
appointed supreme judges of the people (24'*- '* 
E). Moses' absence being prolonged, Aaron, at 
the people's request, makes a golden calf as a 
visible symbol of J", for which he afterwards 
weakly excuses himself to Moses, throwing the 
blame upon the people (32'"'- ""'"). At a later 
period Aaron with Miriam opjwses Moses, on the 
ground that they also are recipients of divine 
revelations, Miriam being apparently regarded as 
the leader on this occasion, since the punishment 
falls upon her (Nu 12 E). Some further par- 
ticulars relating to Aaron are to be learnt from 
Dt, in passages apparently based on the narra- 
tive of JE ; namely the intercession offered by 
Moses on his account after the making of the 
golden calf (Dt 9*) ; the choice of Levi as the 
priestly tribe, probably in consequence of the zeal 
shown by them against the idolaters (10*'-) ; the 
death of Aaron at Moserah (site unknown), and 
the succession of his son Eleazar to the priestly 
office (lO*-'', the itinerary probably from E, cf. Nu 
2ii2f. 18. i8ff.). The last passage is important as 
showing that the tradition of a hereditary priest- 
hood in the family of Aaron was found even 
outside the priestly history. Comp. Jos 24^^ E, 
where mention is made oi Phinehas, the son of 
Eleazar the son of Aaron. 

It is, however, in the priestly tradition, where 
the institution of the ordinances of divine worship 
is described at length, that Aaron figures most 
prominently as the founder of the Israelitish 
priesthood, and becomes, indeed, with Moses the 
joint leader of the people. P records several 
details respecting Aaron's family : he is the son of 
Aniram and Jochebed (Ex 6^), and three years 
older than Moses {ih. V, Nu 33**). His wife was 
Elisheba, his sons Nadab, Abihu (ef. Ex 24'- » E?), 
Eleazar (cf. Jos 24^ E), and Ithamar. See Ex 
Q^ etc. A slightly different representation of 
Aaron's first commission is given in Ex 6--7"' P, 
from that in the parallel narrative Ex 4-6' JE. 
Here Aaron is appointed the sjtokesman of Moses, 
not to the people, but to Pharaoh (see 7'), and it is 
before the king that Aaron works a wonder, 
turning his rod into a serpent. From this point 
onwards the importance assi^ied to Aaron in 
P becomes very marked. He regularly co- 
operates with Moses at the time of the 
Egyp. plagues, usually bringing these to pass by 
means of his rod in acconlance with Moses' 
instructions (Ex 7"*'- S"- '*'•). Many commands of 
God are addressed to both leaders alike (Ex 9^''" 
12'- « Lv 11' 13^ 14»=» 15', Nu 2', cf. !»•"•«); 
they are consulted by the people (Nu 9" 15^, cf. 
13'-*), and against both of them the murmurings of 
the people are directed (Ex 16-, Nu 14-, cf.** 
lQ3.*t cf.18 20-). All this, however, does not 
prevent distinct and characteristic j^iarts being 
assigned to each of them. Thus the lirst place is 
given to Moses throughout. He receives the 
divine revelation on Mount Sinai resjiecting the 
appointment of Aaron and his sons to the priest- 
hood (Ex 28'"* 29**), and upon the completion of 
the tabernacle solemnly consecrates tliem, and 
offers the appointed sacrifices (Ex 29, Lv 8. 9). 
Aaron, on the other hand, is specially ' the priest' 
(Ex 31'" 35'* 38*', Lv 13», Nu 18*'), who stays a plague 
by an offering of incense (Nu 16*'"*) ; to his charge 
the tal)ernacle is committed (ib. 45- 1». "f. ssj^ g^nj 
to him the Levites are given in exchange for the 
firstborn (ib. 3*'"-). Aaron is distin^uislied from 
his sons, the inferior priests, by the anointing 
which he receives (Ex 29^ Lv 8'^ cf. Ex 29* 
Lv 4»-''-« 6»-» le*" 21"'-»», Nu 35^) : — pas.sages 
which speak of his sons as being also anointed 



i)robably belong_ to the later additions to the 
rriestly Code (Ex 28« 30» 40^', Lv 7*«, Nu 3=*). 
Uetvveen the family of Aaron and the rest of the 
Levites a sharp distinction is drawn (see esp. 
Nu 3. 4). In tiiis connection it is to be noticed 
that in the main portion of Nu 16 Korah's com- 
panions in his rebellion are called ' princes of the 
congregation' (16-), i.e. not all Levites (cf. Nu 
27^) ; their complaints are directed against the 
exclusive claims of the tribe of Levi, and all mur- 
murings are finally silenced by the miraculous 
budding of the rod of Aaron, the representative of 
the house of Levi (Nu 17^'"). But certain addi- 
tions seem to have been made to the chapter to 
emphasize a different point, and in these passages 
I^orah's companions are regarded as wholly Levites, 
who protest against the superior claims of the house 
of Aaron (Nu lesu-ie-is.sewo) See further, Priests ; 
also Aaroxites, Aaron's Rod.. Korah. 

For failing to show due honour to J" at 
Meribah Kadesh, in the fortieth year of the 
wanderings, Aaron was forbidden to enter the 
promised land (Nu 20^-^). Shortly afterwards, 
accompanied by Moses and his ovra son Eleazar, 
Aaron ascended Mount Hor, on the border of the 
land of Edom, and after being solemnly stripped of 
his priestly garments, which were put on Eleazar, 
died there at the age of 123 (Nu 20^-29 33^- P). 
The site of Mount Hor is uncertain, the traditional 
identification with Jebel Nebi Harun, S.W. of 
Petra, being very doubtful (see DUlm. on Nu 20^) ; 
the itinerary of P (Nu 33^'^) names six stages be- 
tween Moseroth (Dt lO^Moserah) andMt. Hor. 

In the older literature outside the Pent., the 
mission of Moses and Aaron in Egypt is alluded to 
in Jos 24^ E, and 1 S 12*^- ^ (a passage which has 
affinities with E). Micah (6*) names as the leaders 
of the people at the time of the Exodus, Moses, 
Aaron, and ^liriam, but Aaron is not mentioned 
else^\ here in the prophets. H. A. White. 

AARONITES ([nqx 'ij 'sons of Aaron').— This 
phrase might, according to Sem. idiom, denote 
either the members of a class or guild (comp. sons 
of Korah, sons of Asaph, sons of the prophets), or 
members of a family connected by blood kinship. 
As used in OT it was understood in the latter 
sense, all the priests, at anyrate from the time of 
the second temple, tracing their descent from 
Aaron, as the head and foimder of the Israelitish 
priesthood. The term does not occur earlier than 
the priestly portions of the Pent., where in certain 
groups of laws the epithet Aaronites is often given 
to the priests (see esp. Lv 1-3, and comp. 6* 
' Aaron and his sons '), and a sharp distinction is 
drawn between the Aaronite priests and the 
Levites who wait upon them (see esp. Nu 3^* 
JQ40 igi-T) j^ jg doubtful whether any mention 
of the Aaronites or seed of Aaron Avas to be 
found in the original H (Law of Holiness), 
the present text of Lv 17^ pp-i'-^i-a^ 222-*-i8 
being probably due to the E. The Chronicler 
di^-ides the priests into the houses of Eleazar and 
Ithamar, assigning sixteen courses to the former 
and eight to the latter ; and, probably without 
good authority, he connects the former with the 
Zadokite priests of Jerus., and the latter with 
the family of Eli (1 Ch 24), though the name of 
one of Eli's sons (cf. also 1 S 2"^'-) would suggest a 
connexion between this family and Phinehas the 
son of Eleazar (Jos 24^). Throughout his work 
the priests are frequently termed the Aaronites 
(sons of Aaron)— viz. 1 Ch 6^-5' 15"' 232«-3-- 24i-3i, 
2 Ch 139- 1» 261'* 2921 3P9 35", Neh 10^ 12*^. In 
1 Ch 12'^ 271^ the house or family of Aaron is 
placed on a level with the other triljes ; and 
similarly in some late Psalms, by the side of the 
House of Israel and the House of Levi, the priestly 

class is described as the House of Aaron (Ps 115'"-" 
IW ISo"*). H. A. White. 

AARON'S ROD.— Aaron's rod is the centre of 
interest in an important incident of the desert 
wanderings — time and place are both uncertain — 
as recorded by the priestly narrator (P), Nu H^^" 
(Heb. text 17*""^). The passage should be studied 
in connexion with the more complex narrative in 
ch. 16, to the events of which the incident in 

?uestion forms the sequel (see Driver, LOT 59 i.). 
n obedience to a divine command, 12 rods, repre- 
senting the 12 princes of the tribes, each with the 
name of a prince engraved upon it, together with a 
13th rod (cf. Vulg. fueruntque virgae duodecim 
absque virga Aaron) to represent the tribe of Levi, 
but bearing the name of Aaron, were deposited by 
Moses before 'the testimony,' i.e. before the ark. 
The following morning it was found that ' the rod 
of Aaron for the house of Levi was budded, and 
put forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and bare 
ripe almonds' (17* RV), by which it was miracu- 
lously proved that J" had Himself selected the 
tribe of LeW to be the exclusive possessors of the 
priestly prerogatives. The standpoint of the 
narrator is thus different from that of a later 
stratum in the foregoing section, wliich represents 
a party of Levites in revolt against the exclusive 

Eriesthood of the sons of Aaron. ' Aaron's rod that 
udded ' was ordered to be put back to its former 
place ' before the [ark of the] testimony' (17^") as a 
token to future generations of the divine choice. 
A later JeA^sh tradition, at variance with this 
command, and with the express statement of 1 K 8^, 
is found in He 9^, and in later Jewish writers, that 
the rod, like the pot of manna, had a place with 
the tables of stone within the ark. 

A. R. S. Kenxedy. 
AB.— See Names (Proper), and Time. 

ABACUC. — The form in which the name of the 
prophet Habakkuk appears in 2 Es 1*". 

ABADDON.— This word is found in the OT 
only in the Wisdom Literature. When it first 
appears, the old view of Sheol as a place where 
the family, national, and social distinctions of the 
world above are reproduced, had been partially 
displaced ; and in some measure the higher concep- 
tion had gained acceptance, which held that in Sheol 
at all events moral distinctions were paramount, 
and that men were treated there according to their 
deserts. In Job 31^ Abaddon (Jt^jk) bears the 
general meaning of ' ruin,' ' destruction.' (But see 
Dillm. and Dav. in loc. } In the other instances of its 
occurrence, however, it is specialised, and designates 
the place of the lost in Sheol. Thus in Job 26", Pr 
15^1 27'-^ (^"i-**, in Ker6 p"3x) it occurs in conjunction 
with 'Sheol' (Wr), and in Ps 88" with 'grave' 
(nnp). Again, in Job 28- a further development is 
to be observed. In this passage it is linked Avitli 
death (mc), and personified in the same way as we 
find Kjcy in Dn 4^ and Hades in Rev 6®, and 
c'cc and cipa in the Talmud. The word is found 
once more in the Bible in Rev 9". In this passage 
it is used as the proper name of a prince of the 
infernal regions, and explained by the word 'AttoX- 
Xi/a>;'=' Destroyer.' In the LXX jn^x is always 
rendered by dirdiXeia, except in Job 31^ where LXX 
implies a different text. The first two meanings 
above gi'^en are found in the Aram, and later Heb. 
Finally, in the latter in the 'Emek Hammelech, f . 15. 
3, Abaddon becomes the lowest place of Gehenna. 

R. H. Charles. 

ABADIAS ('A/3a5taj), 1 Es S^s.— Son of Jezelus, of 
the sons of Joab, returned Avith Ezra from captivity. 
Called Obadiah, son of Jehiel, Ezr 8*. 

H. St. J. Thackeray. 



ABAGTHA (kp^3I|, Est 1"), one of the seven 
chnralMTlains or eunuchs sent by Ahaauerus 
(Xerxes) to fetch the queen, Vashti, to his 
bonquet. The name, which is apparently Persian, 
is i)robablv akin to the names Bigtha (1^») and 
Hijithan (2-'). For the derivation; bagddna = ' God's 
gift,' has been suggested, but cannot be regarded 
as certain. In the LXX tiie names of the chamber- 
lains are quite different from the Hebrew. 

H. A. White. 

ABANAH (nj^u, Kerfi njw, AV Abana ; AVm 
Aniana, KVm Amanah ; 2 K 6"). This ; river of 
I )Hmuscus,' the Chrysorrhoas of theGreeks,i8 identi- 
!ied with the Barnda, to whose M-aters Damascus 
owes her life. Rising in the uplands near Baalbec, 
it drains the hollow in the bosom of Anti-Lebanon. 
Ain el Barada, in the plain of Zcbeddny, swells 
the stream, which then plunges down the deep 
picturesque Korge of iVady Barada. About 
14 miles N.W. of Damascus, in a beautiful 
romantic spot in the heart of the hills, rises the 
mighty fountain el Fijeh (Or. inrfh, a spring) ; a 
river born in a moment, which, after a brief, 
foaming course, joins the Barada, more than 
doubling its volume. It then flows along the 
bottom of a deep winding valley, shaded by 
beautiful and fruitful trees ; bare, yellow rocks 
towering high on either hand above the green. 
About half the water is led captive along the 
eastern bank towards the city, the Beyrout road 
passing between the streams. Just where the 
precipitous cliffs advance as if to close the gorge, 
it escapes from the mountains, and, throwing itself 
out fanlike in many branches, waters the plain, 
supplies the city, and drains off into the northern 
two of the marshy lakes eastward. One branch is 
called Nahr Banuis, a reminiscence of the ancient 
name. W. J '.wing. 

ABARIH (Dn^i-ri).— A plural form of the word 
signifying ' part beyond ' ; and with respect to the 
Jordan, on tne E. side of it. It is used as a proper 
name preceded by -n 'mount' (Nu 27'-', Dt SS?**), 
and by 'irj ' mountains ' (Nu 33^^). It is also found 
with »Ji [see Iye-abarim] (Nu 21" 33«). In all 
these places the def. art. is used wth Abarim, but 
in Jer 22^ (RV Abarim, AV ' the passages ') the 
def. art. is not used. For the geogr. position see 
Nebo. The LXX translate A. by t6 vipav, except in 
Nu 33*^, Dt 32« where they have rd (t6) 'A^apelvi/i). 
For Ezk 39", and a very doubtful use of this word, 
see Smend, in loe. A. T. Chapman. 

ABASE, ABASEMENT. — Abase is three times 
used in AV, and retained in RV to translate 
hzv shdphfl, otherwise rendered ' bring low ' or 
' make low,' ' bring down ' or ' bow down,' 
' humble' ; and once to tr. njy, Is 31* ' he will not 
l»e afraid of their voice, nor abase himself ( = be 
cast down) for the noise of them.' In NT it is five 
times used to render raweivbu, changed in RV into 
' humble,' except in Th 4" ' I know how to be 
abased,' and 2 Co 11' ' Commit a sin in abasing 
myself.' Abasement, meaning humiliation, occurs 
in Sir 20" ' 'Hiere is an a. because of glory ; and 
there is that lifteth up his head from a low estate.' 
Cf. Sir 26" RV ' A wicked woman is a. of heart ' 
(AV ' abateth the courage '). Notice that 'abase- 
ment ' and ' basement ' (a mod. word) are distinct, 
both in derivation and meaning. J. Hastinu.s. 

ABATE.— Thin verb occurs only six times in 
AV (all in UT), and yet it translates five 
different Heb. words. The meaning of the Eng. 
word is, however, the same throughout, to lessen. 
' His eye was not dim, nor his natural force 
abated [Driver : ' neither had his freshness fled '1 
(Dt 34^1. • It shall be abated (RV an abatement 

shall be made) from thy estimation' (Lv 27'*). 
(See Estimation.) 'The waters were abated' 
(RV 'decreased') (Gn 8»). RV tr, still another 
Heb. word ' abated ' in Nu IP (AV 'was quenched'). 
The word is also found with the same sense in 
Wis IG'", Sir 25-», 1 Mac 5^ 11*». Cf. Shakespeare— 

' Abate thy race, abate thy manly nute.' 

—Henry V. HI. U. 24. 

And Walton, ' Lord, abate my great afiiiction, or 
increase my patience,' Lives, iv. 288. 

J. Hastings. 

ABBA. — The transliteration (ip^d.) of the Aram, 
word for ' father ' ; see, for example, the Targ. of 
Onk. (perhaps of the 1st cent.) at Gn 19** (cr. G. 
Dalman, Gram. d. jud.-paldst. Aramdisch, § 40, c. 
3). It occurs three times in the NT, and always 
in direct address, viz. in our Lord's prayer in 
Gethsemane as given by St. Mark (14*^), and in 
the ' cry ' of the Spirit as referred to by St. Paul 
(Ro 8i», Gal 4«). 

The phenomena connected with the form and 
use of the word have occasioned divers opinions, 
the merits of which our present knowledge does 
not always enable us to pronounce upon with 

Sositiveness. It has been held, for instance (see 
ohn Lightfoot, Horce Hebr. ad Me. I.e.), that 
when spelt with the double b and final a, the word 
refers to physical fatherhood ; accordingly, our 
Lord's choice of that form is thought to indicate 
special closeness of relationship. But the frequent 
use of Abba simply as a title of honour in the 
Mishna and Tosefta seems to disprove this opinion 
(Schurer, HJP § 25, n. 30 ; cf. Jg 17'», 2 K 2'-, Mt 
23*). On the other hand, it has been asserted that in 
Syr. the word with the double b denotes a spiritual 
father, with a single b the natural. But this dis- 
tinction also seems not to be sustained by usage (see 
Payne Smith's Lexicon, s. v. ). Again,it is noteworthy 
that the Gr. equivalent, 6 irar^p, is appended to the 
term in all three instances of its occurrence. The 
second Evangelist, indeed, in other cases sometimes 
introduces the Aj-am. terms used by our Lord (see 
541 711. 34) . ijut; in those cases the added Gr. trans- 
lation is preceded by an explanatory phrase dis- 
tinctly marking it as such. Moreover, the Apostle 
Paul makes the same addition of 6 varrip in both 
instances. Had the term ' Abba,' then, become a 
quasi proper name ? Indications are not wanting 
that it had already taken on a degree of con- 
ventional sacredness ; servants were forbidden 
to use it in addressing the head of the house 
(Berachoth 166, cited bjy^ Delitzsch on Rom. I.e.). 
It seems to have been the favourite appellation of 
God employed by Jesus in prayer (cf. Mt ll^^-^s 
26^- «, Lk 10-' 22*3 23", Jn 11« 1227-28 171.11. 24. »)_ 
This would greatly promote its use in Christian 
circles ; and though tlie second word was probably 
added primarily by Gr. -speaking Jews in explana- 
tion 01 the first, usage doubtless soon gave the 
phrase the force of an intensified repetition and 
the currency of a devotional formula. Merely 
impassioned repetition, indeed, ordinarily adheres 
to the same term (as Kvpu, Kvpie, Mt T--* ; iJXef, 
^\fi, 27**); such expressions, therefore, as val, 
i/x^v. Rev V (cf. 2 Co l^*) ; 'Amen, So be it'; 
' Hallelujah, Praise the Lord,' are closer ana- 
logues. Rabbinical examples are not wanting 
of similar combinations; see Schoettgen, Hor<B 
llchr. on Mark, I.e. J. H. THAYER. 

ABDA (Kt3y), 'servant, sc. of the Lord'; cf. names 
Obadiah, Abdeel, Ebed.— 1. 'Efp6. B, 'A/3a«i A, 
'ESpd/t Luc. Father of Adoniram, master of 
Solomon's forced levy (1 K 4«). 2. 'A/SSdi k, 
'ASSidj Luc. A Levite descended from Jeduthun 
(Neh 11"). Called Obadiah (1 Ch 9»«). 

C. F. Burney. 



ABDEEL ('?JrT55:), father of Sheleniiah (Jer 36^), 
one of those ordered by King Jehoiakim to arrest 
Jeremiah and Baruch. Sept. omits. 

ABDI ('-^x, perhaps for nn?s: ' servant of Yah,' cf. 
Palmvr. ^ly). — 1. Grandfather of the musician 
Ethan, 1 Ch 6«. 2. Father of Kish, 2 Ch 29'^ 
3. A Jew who had married a foreim wife, Ezr 10* 
= Aedias, 1 Es 9=". H. A. White. 

ABDIAS (2 Es 1»).— Obadiah the prophet. 

ABDIEL (^x'^^i- ' servant of God ').— Son of Guni 
(1 Ch 5^5). See Genealogy. 

ABDON (;•"; 'servile').—!. Son of Hillel, of 
Pirathon in Ephraim, the last of the minor judges, 
Jg 12'*"^^ 2. A famDy of the tribe of Benjamin 
dwelling in Jerus., 1 Ch 8^. 3. A Gibeonite 
family dwelling in Jerus., 1 Ch 8^ 9=». 4. A 
courtier of Josiah, 2 Ch 34^ ; in 2 K 22^ his name 
is Achbor. G. A. Cooke. 

ABDON (iraK).— A Levitical city of Asher (Jos 
2P^ 1 Ch 6'^), now (v. d. Yelde) 'Abdeh E. of Achzib 
on the hills {S1VP, vol. i. sheet iii.). 


ABEDNEGO Oi} ^5;: ; ij; = perh. Sz; ' serv-ant of 
Xebo'; soHitzig, Gratz,'Schrader).— See Shadrach. 

ABEL {hzn, 'A^eX).— The second son (twin?) of 
Adam and Eve, by occupation a herdsman (Gn 4^), 
oft'ered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain 
(He 11^), and out of jealousy was slain by his elder 
brother (Gn 4*. See Caix). The current etymology 
('?^n breath, vanity) has been disputed by the 
Assyriologists, who connect the name with ablu, 
abal, 'son' (cf. Asurbanipal) ; but while this may 
well be the root, it does not follow that it gives the 
etymology in the mind of the writer. There would 
have been no point in naming the younger brother 
' son' (Franz Delitzsch), and it is lletter to suppose 
that the proper name was here designed to suggest 
the idea of the short-lived or possibly the shepherd 
(cf. S;;). The representation of A. as a shepherd 
coincides with the OT tradition of the superiority 
of the pastoral life. The ground of the acceptance 
of A.'s offering (Gn 4'*) is not its conformity to a 
revealed command, nor its character of blood, but 
the spirit of true piety which was expressed in his 
giving to God his best, viz. the firstlings of the 
nock, and of these the fattest portions. Cain's 
knowledge of God's acceptance of A.'s oflering 
implies a visible sign, probably the kindling of the 
sacritice by fire from heaven (cf. 1 K 18*). In NT 
Abel appears as the first martyr (Mt 23^), and as 
a hero of faith (He ll"*), while his death is 
contrasted with that of Christ as calling, not for 
forgiveness, but for vengeance (cf. Westcott on He 
12'^). The character and the fate of A. reflect 
the Jewish consciousness of the enduring division of 
mankind into the two classes of the people and 
the enemies of God, and of the persecutions 
endured by His chosen peojile at the hands of their 
enemies (cf. 1 Jn 3'-). 

Literati-re.— Schrader, COT ; Dillmann, Genegi* ; Delitzsch, 
Genesis ; and Literature of Sacrifice. 

W. P. Patersox. 
ABEL C'^Ni, 'meadow.' — The name of various 

{)laces in Pal. and Syria, situated by cultivable 
ands. In one passage (1 S 6^*) Abel stands 
apparently for Eben (l??). ' stone ' (see RV, AVm, 
LXX, and. Tar.), applying to a 'great stone' at 
Bethshemesh of Juclah. 

1. Abel-beth-maacah (AV maachah) (ti's Vjk 
."!2,-5), 'Abel of the House of Maachah' in Upper 
Galilee (2 S 20"- ^5. is)^ ^ow 'Abil Kamh, 'Abel of 
wheat,' on the plateau of the mountains a little W. 

of TeU el-Ka4i (Dan). It was taken by the Syrians 
in the 10th cent. B.C. (IK 15**, 2 Ch 16^), and by 
the Assyrians about B.C. 732 (2 K 15*) (HIVF, vol. i. 
sheet ii. ). 

2. Abel-cheramim (a*?";? Vzx), 'meadow of vine- 
yards ' ( Jg 1 1^), on the Aloab plateau near Minnith. 

3. Abel-maim (d:? '?5k), ' meadow of waters ' (2 Ch 
16*), the same as No. 1. The mountains in this 
region are well watered, and the site noted for com, 
as its modem name shows. 

4. Abel-meholah (nSins b'sx), 'meadow of the 
dance,' or of the 'circle* (Jg' 7^, 1 K 4^=' 19^*), in 
the Jordan Valley near Bethshean. In the 
Onomasticon [s.v. Abel ^laula) it is placed 10 Rom. 
miles from Scythopolis (Bethshean), which points to 
the present 'Ain Helweh, or ' sweet spring,' near 
which is a ruined mound. See SWF, vol. ii. sh. ix. 

5. Abel-mizraim (cn>-? Sjx), ' meadow of Egyptians' 
(Gn 50"), or (with difierent points Vzx for ^5k) 
'mourning of Egyptians.' There is a play on the 
word in this passage. It was between Egypt and 
Hebron, yet is described as ' beyond Jordan.' It is 
difficult to suppose that such a route would be taken 
to Hebron, nor was the region beyond Jordan in 
Canaan. The site is unknown (see Atad). [See 
Delitzsch and DUlm. in loc.; Driver, Deut. p. xliif., 
and Taylor in Expos. Times (1896), vii. 407.] 

6. Abel-shittim (cayn bzK), 'meadow of acacias' 
(Nu 33^), in other passages Shittim only (which 
see). The place is described as in the plains of 
Moab. The Jordan plain E. of the river, opposite 
Jericho, is the site now called Gho^r el Seiseodn, or 
' valley of acacias.' The plain is well watered, and 
still dotted with acacias. (See SEP, vol. i.) 


ABHORRING.— In Is 66^ ' abhorring ' means a 
thing that is abhorred, an abhorrence: 'They 
shall be an a. unto aU flesh.' The same Heb. 
word (|i»«l") is tr. * contempt ' in Dn 12- ' Some to 
shame and everlasting contempt ' (RVm ' abhor- 
rence '). J. Hastixgs. 

ABI ('ZK, probably = ' (my) father' * ; LXX 'A^oi)) is 
the name of a queen-mother of the 8th cent. 
(2 K 18-) who is called Abijah in the parallel 
passage 2 Ch 29^. The reading in Kings is the 
most probable. Abi was daughter of Zechariah 
(? cf. Is 8^), wife of Aliaz, and mother of Hezekiah. 

G. B. Gray. 

ABIA, ABIAH.— See Abijah. 

ABI-AL60N (p2^r'5»<, A 'AeteX/Swi').— A member 
of ' the Thirty,' or third division of Da^-id's heroes 
(2 S 2331). In the parallel passage (1 Ch 11^') we 
find 'Abiel' ('jx'^k) ; this is undoubtedly right, 
and is supported by B ((TaSJa^StT/X) and Luc 
([Ta\a-]a^ir]s). Klostermann has further conjectured 
that the final syllable ' bon ' (pa) of Abi-albon is a 
corruption of 'Beth' (n'3), and belongs to the 
foUo^ving word ("nnyn). WeUhausen and Budde 
restore Abi-baal (^w^k). See Arbathite. 

J. F. STEXyiNG. 

ABIASAPH (i;x'aK 'Abhi-asaph = 'i&ther has 
gathered^), Ex 6-* = EBIASAPH (i?;?*! 'Ebh-vasaph 
= 'father has increased'), 1 Ch 623-=^ g^^; cf. further 
1 Ch 26', where Asaph occurs by error for one of 
the two preceding forms ; see Bertheau, i.l. 

The evidence for the alternative forms may be thus sum- 
marised : — 

For Abiasaph— Heb. text and Targ. at Ex 6^1 ; and possibly 
Vulg. (Abiagaph) in aU places, and LXX ('Aj<<w<t; or 
'AStcu-mp) in all places except cod. B in 1 Ch 62»; but 
Vulg. and LXX are really ambiguous. 

For Ebyasaph— Sam. at Ex 63* ; Heb. text in all passages in 
Chronicles. Against the middle k of Abiasaph, and there- 
fore in favour of Ebyasaph, are the Syr. f. c^m^ '~'j. Ex 

• On the meanings of this name and the following names be- 
g^inning with .\bi, see further art. Namks, Proper. 



««, 1 Oh 6» ; wSLkJSQol. 1 Ch t^ V) wad UUC, B 

(•A;Jni««^»nn'3K) in 1 Ch (TO. 

The evitloncc thus preponderates in favour of 

Ehin8n[»h is the name of a division of the 
Korainte Levites, and is mentioned only in the 
genealojfies of 1* and tlie Chronicler. According 
to 1 Cli 0'' 28» (in the latter passage read 
Ehiasaph for Asa|»h ; see above), a section of the 
division acted as uoorkeepers. On the difficulties 
whicli arise when Kbiasaph in the genealogies is 
(erroneously) regarded as an individual, see the 
article in Smith's DB. G. B. Grav. 

ABIATHAR (To;?t« ' father of plenty,' for ■m:3N, 
or 'The Great one is father' [Biihr]). — A land- 
holder (1 K 2^) of Anathoth in Benjamin, a 
priestly city (Jos 21*'), whence also sprung the 
priest-prophet Jeremiah. He was son or the high 
priest Ahijah or Ahimelech, and is first mentioned 
in 1 S 22'''', where it is implied that he alone 
escaped from the massacre of the priests at Nob. 
According to the Heb. text of 1 S 23^ he joined 
David at Keilah, in which case 22^ would be pro- 
leptic, and 23'^- * might be explained by supposing 
that David could inquire of the Lord by a prophet 
(1 S 28«), e.ff. Gad (225) ; but according to the 
LXX 'he went down with David into Keilah,' 
apparently from the forest of Hareth ; and this 
seems to harmonise better with the story. David 
felt a special appeal to his afl'ections in the young 
priest's position : ' I have occasioned the death of 
all the persons of tliy father's house. Abide thou 
with me, fear not ; for he that seeketh my life 
seeketh thy life.' The friendship thus cemented 
by a common danger was remembered long after- 
wards by Solomon when commuting A.'s death 
sentence into degradation : ' thou hast oeen afflicted 
in all wherein my father was afflicted.' 

The atlhesion of A. was of signal service to 
David, inasmuch as he brought with him an 
ephod, which, whether it were the high priestly 
ephod containing the Urim and Thummim (so 
Jerome, Qn. Heb. in loc, and Jos. Ant. vi. xiv. 6) 
or a sacred image, was at all events a recognised 
method of 'incjuiring of the Lord' (1 S 14i», LXX, 
liVm). In tins way A. was able to continue to 
David (1 S 23* 30') the services rendered before 
by his father (1 S 22"). Dean Stanley mentions 
(Jevnsh Ch. Lect. 36) a Jewish tradition that the 
power of thus inquiring of the Lord expired with 
A. ; and possibly in virtue of this power he is men- 
tioned as one of David's counsellors (1 Ch 27^"). 

In David's flight from Absalom we find A. 
loyal, and only prevented by David's request from 
sharing his master's exile ; and his son Jonathan, 
with Ahimaaz, used to convey from the priests to 
the king secret intelligence of Absalom's plans. 
It is very doubtful if the words of Solomon, 
'Thou barest the ark of the Lord God liefore 
David my father' (1 K 2"^), refer to the attemj.t 
made by Zadok and A. to carry the ark with 
David on his flight (Stanley), or to the commis- 
sion given by David to Zadok and A. (1 Ch IS*'"") 
to superintend the carrying of the ark by the 
Ixjvites from the house of (Jbetledom to Mt. Zion 
(I/ord A. Hervey). On l)oth these occasions A. is 
not so prominent as Zadok (see esp. 2 S 15*-"-'*, 
where Griitz reads, 'A. went up' for '8too<l 
still,' cf. Jos 3'^). The reference is much more 
general, and alludes to the custom of the ark 
as the symlx)! of J"'s presence accompanying the 
host to battle (see, e.g., Nu 31', Jos 0«" 1 S 4», 
2 S 11"). The attempt made by Zadok and A. 
was an instance of this custom, and not a new 
departure; and David refuses to permit it, not 
because it was a violation of the sanctity of the 

ark, but as being himself unworthy to claim 
the special protection of J". It niav here be 
noted that a coniecture has been maue, that as 
Zadok ministered at the tabernacle at Gibeon 
(1 Ch 16*®), so A. may have been the custodian of 
the ark on Mt. Zion. On the defeat of Absalom, 
Zadok and A. smoothed the way for the king's 
restoration (2 S 19"). A.'s loyalty did not, how- 
ever, remain proof to the end ; he united with Joab 
in lending his influence to the abortive insurrection 
of Adonijah. Both priest and chief captain were 
possibly actuated by jealousy, the one of Zadok, 
and the other of Benaiah. But while Joab was 
executed in accordance with David's dying in- 
structions, A.'s life was spared in consideration of 
his old loyalty : ' So Solomon thrust out A. from 
bein<:f priest unto the Lord ; that he might fulfil the 
word of the Lord which He spake concerning the 
house of Eli in Shiloh' (1 K 2^"). 

With the deposition of A. the direct high priestly 
line of Eleazar came to an end. It is important 
to emphasize this, since it has been commonly 
held, on the authority of Cliron. and Josephus, that 
the high priests, from Eli to A. inclusive, were 
of the line of Ithamar, and that the line of 
Eleazar was restored in the person of Zadok. 
Let us examine the evidence on which this state- 
ment rests. 

The Chronicler mentions as priests in David's 
time, ' Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahime- 
lech of the sons of Ithamar' (1 Ch 24^-"*), this 
Ahimelech being son of A., according to v.^. Now 
'Ahimelech, son of A.,' is quite unhistorical. In 
2 S 15^, 1 K l-*^, Jonathan is son and representa- 
tive of A. ; and, moreover, A. did not lose the 
office of high priest until the reign of Solomon. 
The mistake originated in 2 S 8", where, by a 
very ancient error, ' Ahimelech, son of A.,' is joint 
priest with Zadok. The emendation, 'A., son of 
Ahimelech,' found in the Syr. version, is adopted 
by Gesenius, Wellhausen, and Driver, and may be 
regarded as certain. The Chronicler not only 
copies the mistake (1 Ch 18*®), with the obvious 
blunder ' Ahimelech,' but treats this Ahimelech as 
a real personage. It is noteworthy that Josephus in 
his paraphrase of 1 Ch 24 {Ant. vii. 14. 7) mentions 
A., not Ahimelech, and vet he accepts (viii. 1. 3, 
V. 10. 4) the descent of A. from Ithamar, and further 
distinctly asserts that during the high priesthood 
of Eli and his successors the descendants of Eleazar 
were merely private individuals. The Chronicler, 
on the other hand, ignores Eli and his descendants, 
and in 1 Ch e'"**- *"'*' gives what seems intended 
to be a list of high priests from Aaron to the 
Captivity in the line of Eleazar. Those who are 
familiar with the peculiar tendencies of the Chron- 
icler Avill not think the suggestion unreasonable, 
that here we have an attempt both to vindicate 
the unbroken succession of the high priests of 
his own time, and to evade what he would have 
considered a stumbling-block in the earlier his- 
tory. Thus, if A. were the lineal successor of 
Eleazar, would not his deposition be a breaking on 
(iod's part of the promise to Phinehas of an ever- 
lasting priesthood? (Nu 25"). Yet the unbiassed 
reader of 1 S 2-'*' can scarcely fail to see a plain 
allusion to the promise to Phinehas, and a no less 
plain assertion that the promise was conditional : 
' I said, indeed, that thy house, and the house of 
thy father, should walk before Me for ever : but 
now the Lord saith. Be it far from Me,' etc. 
These words cannot refer to the general promise 
to Aaron's family in Ex 29*, for God's purpose in 
that resnect was not altered ; the Aaronic descent 
of Zadolv being undisput«d. It is interesting to 
observe that the Chronicler does not say that Eli's 
family had usurped the high priesthood, as Josephus 
insinuates; and, indeed, siich a usurpation could not 



have been jMissed over in silence in the earlier his- 
tory had it ever occurred. The Chronicler, on the 
other hand, pro\ides an explanation of another 
stumbling - block — the dual hi^h priesthood of 
Zadok anil A. in Da\ ids reign— by the statement 
with whioli 1 Ch 24 opens, that 'Eleazar and 
Ithamar executed the priests' otfice.' This seems 
an excellent precedent for a dual priesthood, but 
labours under two difficulties: first, that it ia 
quite unsupported by the Pent, and Josh., in 
which Eleazar alone is high priest after Aaron's 
death ; and, secondly, that although Zadok's name 
always comes first when the two are mentioned 
together, yet A. was the chief until the reign 
of Solomon, when Zadok was promoted to his 
place (1 K 2^). It is remarkable, too, that the 
priests who serve in Ezekiel's ideal temple are 
always styled 'the sons of Zadok' (40« 43i» 44" 
48^^), as if they could claim no higher antiquity. 

A. is mentioned in 1 K 4^ as still joint priest 
with Zadok ; but this is probably a mistake, or 
may refer to the beirinning of Solomon's reign, just 
as, in 2 S 23, Asahel and Uriah are enumerated 
among Davids mighty men. There is a ditficulty 
connected with the mention of A. in Mk 2^ RV, 
where Christ is made to say that DaArid ate the 
shewbread ' when A. -was high priest,' ^xi 'AfiidOap 
apxiepi(^'i, B, K, Vulg. ('sub A. principe sacer- 
dotum ■"). The words are omitted by D and some 
Old Latin MSS, while A, C, 1, 33 insert roO before 
ipXt^fxtj^^, ' in thie days of A. the high priest,' i.e. 
in his lifetime, but not necessarily during his high 
priesthood. N. J. D. White. 

ABIB -'-^T, always with art., /*V twit wiwr, 
mensii /.<^.ty/«//i or novarum frugnm. Ex 13* 23^ 
34 ^ Dt 161). See Time. 

ABIDA /;— 2N 'mv father had knowledge'). — A 
son of Midian ^Gn 25^ AV Abidah, 1 Ch 1*"). 

ABIDAN (n*^? ' father is judge') is a name that 
occurs only in P. According to this document, 
Abidan, son of Gideoni, of the tribe of Benjtunin, 
was one of the twelve 'princes' who represented 
their respective tribes at the census and on certain 
other occasions, Xu 1" ^ 7®-® lO^*. 

G. B. Gray. 

ABIDE. — In AV and RV 'abide' is used 
both transitively and intransitively. 1. As a 
trans, verb in two senses : (a) to await, be in 
store for, as Ac 2i)^ ' Bonds and afflictions abide 
me'; cf. Ps 37^ (Pr. Bk.) 'They that patiently 
abide the Lord.' (b) To withstand, endure, as 
Jer 10^* ' The nations shall not be able to abide 
His indignation ' ; Mai 3- ' But who may abide 
the day of His coming ? ' Cf . ' They cannot abide 
to hear of altering,' Pref. to AV 1611 ; ' Nature 
cannot abide that any place should be empty,' 
H. Smith (1593i, Senn. 97. 2. As an intrans. 
verb in three senses : {a) to continue in the place 
or in the state in which one now is, as Ac 27^* 
' Except these abide in the ship ' ; Jn 12** * Ex- 
cept a corn of wiieat fall into the groimd, and die, 
it abideth alone ' : 1 Co 7" ' She is happier if she 
so abide ' ; 2 Mac 7^" ' abide a while, and behold his 
great power.' (6) To dwell, reside, as Lk 8^ 'And 
wore no clothes, neither abode in any house, 
but in the tombs ' ; Ps 61* ' I vnll abide (RV 
' dwell ■ ) in Thy tabernacle for ever ' ; Jn 8^ 
' And the lx»nd-servant abideth not in the house 
for ever: the son abideth for ever'; Jn 15^ 'He 
that abideth in Me, and I in him.' (e) To last, 
endure (esp. in the face of trial, cf. 1 (6), above), as 
1 Co 3"'^ ' If anv man's work abide ' ; Ps 119** 
' Thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.' 
Abiding, as an adj., is used by RV, He 10** 'a 
better possession and an a. one,' and 13" 'an a. 

city ' ; as a noun it is found 1 Es 8*^ ' they have 
given us a sure a. in Jewry.' J. Hastings. 

ABIEL ('JK'JK 'father is God'). — 1. Son of 
Zeror, of the tribe of Benj., was father of Kishand 
Ner, and consequently grandfather of Saul and 
Abner, 1 S 9^ U^K According to 1 Ch8»=9» Ner 
was fatlier of Kish ; in this case Abiel would have 
been great-grandfather of Saul. But the statement 
in Ch is an error, very possibly due to transcrip- 
tional causes ; trie?. Bertnean on 1 Ch 8^. 2. The 
name of one of David's 'thirty men' (2 S 23") = 
1 Ch U^. The form (Abi-albon) under which this 
man's name now appears in the Heb. text of Samuel 
is due to textual corruption ; Wellhausen (on 2 S 
23**) supposes the original form to have been 
Abihaal ; but there seems no sufficient reason to 
doubt the form (Abiel) preserved in Chron. ; cf. 
Driver on 2 S 2S^. G. B. Gray. 

ABIEZER (iix^. 'father is help'). — 1, The 
name of a clan (-Tij???? Jos 17* (P or R) ; »j^k Jg 
6^) belonging to the tribe of Manasseh (Jg'6^). 
Consequently, in genealogical descriptions of the 
tribal relations, Abiezer appears as a eon or 
descendant of Manasseh, Jos 17*, 1 Ch 7^, Nu 
26* (P ; in this last passage the name is -written 
lezer, iJS'x, LXX 'Axt^fep). The most distinguished 
member of the clan was Gideon, who describes it 
(cf., however, Moore llntem. Critical Comment- 
ary^ on Jg 6^) as 'the poorest in Manasseh,* 
Jg 6^, cf. 8^. In the time of Gideon the clan 
was settled at Ophrah of the Abiezrites (Jg 6**, 
cf. v."), which perhaps lay near Shechem. In any 
case it would be unsafe, from P's statement that 
Abiezer was a son of Gilead (Nu 26** ; cf. 1 Ch 7**, 
but cf. Jos 17*), to infer that the clan was ever 
settled on the E. of Jordan ; cf. Dillmann on Nu 
2^. 2. Abiezer the Anathothite, i.e. man of 
Anathoth in Benjamin (1 Ch 27"*; cf. Jer P), 
was one of David's heroes, 2 S 23^=1 Ch 11^. 
According to 1 Ch 27" he was the acting military 
officer of David's army in the 9th month. Abiezrite 
is the gentilic form. G. B. Gray. 

ABIGAIL and (2 S 17» RV) Abigal (Heb. gener- 
ally '?:i'5x, 3 times ^>'?k, once each "tt^x, ^j^jt 
'father is joy,' or, perhaps, if the ' be not original, 
'has rejoiced.' — 1. The discreet and beautiful 
wife of Nabal the Carmelite. Hearing of her 
husband's dismissal of David's messengers, and 
refusal of their request, unknown to her husband 
she went to meet Da^dd with provisions for him 
and his men, and in this way so gained David's 
favour that he abandoned his intended raid on 
Nabal. Some ten days after, Nabal died, and 
subsequently Abigail became David's wife : this 
was auter David's former wife, Michal, had been 
given to Palti, but apparently at about the same 
time that he also married Ahinoam the Jezreelitess. 
Together with Ahinoam, Abigail shared David's 
life at Gath, suffered captivitv (from Ziklag) by the 
Amalekites, and was speedily rescued; later she 
lived with David at Hebron, and there bore a son, 
— ChUeab (2 S 3*) or Daniel (1 Ch 3^) by name,— 
1 S 25 ; also 27» 305-« 2 S 2* 3*, 1 Ch 3^. 

2. A sister of Zeruiah — and according to 1 Ch 2^^ 
also of David — who through her union with Ithra 
the IshmaeUte (see art. Ithra) became mother of 
Amasa. The words in 2 S 17** {emm), which 
assert that she was a daughter of Nahash, are 
probably an intrusion from v." (rra p^the son of 
Nahash') ; cf. Wellhausen, i.l. G. B. Gray. 

ABIHAIL (Heb. !?!n':9c 'father is might').— 
According to the Massora the name is resid ^"rrait 
(with .1, not n) in 1 Ch 2" 2 Ch 1118 ; t^t this is 
probably the result of a pre-Massoretic tran- 




Bcriptionali'iK'i'. 1. M.iiiiunci! mily i ■ !')in 

the phraae '/uii'-l, .-tia >>\ .i.i,). 

2. 'Wife' of Abishur, 1 Ch 2'''. 3. l>au-hl.r of 
Klinb, son of Jesse, and conseouontly iv niece of 
IJavid's. The only uassage (2 Cli 11'") when' she is 
mentioned is slightly corni pi ; Imt, ;i(((ti.ling to 
the most probable emendatiun, Abihail vas the 
mother of liehoboam's wife Mahalath. According 
to another interpretation, Abihail was wife of 
Kehoboam ; Imt this is not the natural sense of the 
Heb. text, uml i^ nut of harmony with the context ; 
yy\». so imply I hat only one wife has been mentioned. 
4. In this case the name occurs only in 1 Ch 5" 
in a Gadito genealogy ; this Abihail was apparently 
a clan ri'sident in (iilead. 5. Father of Esther, and 
uncle of iMordecai (Est 2" 9»). For the curious 
valiant of LXX, which gives the regular LXX 
c(iui\:il< nt of Abinadab, it is difficult to account. 

G. B. Gray. 
ABIHU (.s-TCt< 'he is father'), second son of 
Aaron by Elish'eba (Ex 6«, Nu 3» 26*', 1 Ch 6^ 
24') : accompanied Moses to the top of Sinai (Ex 
24'- ») : admitted to the priest's office (Ex 28*) : 
slain for otlering strange tire (Lv W- =>, Nu 3* 26", 
1 Ch 24'). W C. Allejt. 

ABIHUD (ii.T?R ' my father is majesty '). — A 
Benjamite, son of Bela (1 Ch 8*). See Genealogy. 

ABIJAH (.T5I5 'Jah is my father').—!. King of 
Judah (^T5{«, 2 Ch 13«'- "i). He is called Abijam 
(Vulg. Abiam), 1 K 14'^ iS^-^e- Nestle explains 
this as equivalent to cyaw ' father of the people ' ; 
but since Abijah is read by thirteen of Kennicott's 
and de Rossi's MSS, supported by the LXX 
'A/3toi/, Abijam is probably a mistake. As being 
the eldest son of Maacah, the favourite wife of 
Kehoboam, his father appointed him ' to be chief, 
even the prince among his brethren ; for he was 
minded to make him king ' (2 Ch 1 1'"). His mother's 
name is variously given as Maacah the daughter 
of Abishalom (1 K l.^^) (Absalom, 2 Ch ll**-^!), or 
Micaiah tlir .laii-liter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Ch 13^). 
Si'c Maacah. He reigned about two years, from 
the eighteenth to the twentieth year of Jeroboam. 
There is probably no reign the accounts of which 
in Kings and Chronicles are so discrepant as that 
of Abijah. In Kings there is nothing related of 
him except that 'lie walked in all the sins of his 
father,' anil tlmt • tliere was war between Abijam 
and Jeroboam ' ; and, in the history of Asa, an 
incidental allusion to ' things that Abijah had 
dedicated ' for the temple. In fact, as in the case 
of Jehoram (2 K 8'*), he was spared bv God 
merely on account of the divine promise to David. 
But in Chronicles not only is there much additional 
historical matter, but Abijah seems to be a great 
and good man, and he is made the utterer of a sort 
of manifesto of the theocratic ]iriiiri|ili s of Judah. 
The desultory warfare impliiil in KiiiL,'s becomes 
in Chronicles one decisive jiitched battle fought in 
the territory of Ephraim, in which Abijah's array 
of 400,000 slay SUU.UOiJ out of the 800,000 mar- 
shalled by Jeroboam. The battle is preceded by 
an oration spoken on Mt. Zemaraim by Abijah. 
After strongly affirming the (ii\ine right of the 
Davidic line, ne dwells on liif I'lrvious impiety of 
Jeroboam's rebellion against KthnhnaTn when the 
latter 'was young and tender-In an r.j, ,iii<l could 
not withstand them ; and now ye think l<> withstand 
the kingdom of the Lord in the hands of the sons of 
David. ' The gods and priests of J udah and Israel are 
sharply contnisted : 'Whosoever cometh to conse- 
crate hini.self with a young bullock and seven rams, 
the same may be a priest of t licm t liat are no gods.' 
The ceremonial of the daily w(ir>lii|i at Jerusalem is 
minutely described, and the lovaity of Judah to 
J* b twice affirmed. The battle Viiidi follows 

reads like an echo of the heroic age of Israel. 
' Jeroboam caused an ambushment to come alK>ut 
behind them. . , . the priests sounded ^vith the 
trumpets (cf. Nu 10" 3P, Jos 6'"), t!i<ii tlui men 
of Judah gave a shout (cf. Jos 6^) ; aiul as the men 
of Judah shouted, it came to pass that God smote 
Jeroboam and all Israel.' Tliree cities of Israel 
were taken : Bethel, Jeshanah, and Ephron. The 
last two are otherwise unknown, unless Ephron 
or Ephrain (RVm) be the same as Ephraim (2 S 
13'®, Jn 11"). Bethel must soon have been re- 
covered by Baasha (2 Ch 16*). After this we are 
told that Abijah ' waxed mighty, and took unto 
himself fourteen wives.' Presumably most of his 
thirty-eight children were born before he came to 
the throne. The Chronicler mentions as his au- 
thority for this reign the commentary (Midrash) 
of the prophet Idoo, who was also one of the 
biographers of Rehoboam. 

2. Samuel's second son, who Avith his brother 
Joel judged at Beersheba (1 S 8-). Their corrupt 
administration of justice was one of the reasons 
alleged by the elders of Israel in justification of 
their demand for a king. The RV retains the 
spelling Abiah in 1 Ch 6^^. 

3. A son of Jeroboam I. who died in childhood. 
His mother having gone disguised to the prophet 
Ahijah to inquire if he should recover, received the 
heavy tidings of the future annihilation of the 
house of Jeroboam, and of the immediate death of 
her child, ' taken away from the evil to come ' : 
' And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him ; 
for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave, 
because in him there is found some good thing 
toward the Lord the God of Israel in the house of 
Jeroboam' (1 K 14*»). 

4. 1 Ch 24". One of the 'heads of fathers' 
houses ' of the sons of Eleazar, who gave his name 
to the 8th of the 24 courses of priests, the arrange- 
ment of whom is ascribed to Da%-id (1 Ch 24^, 
2 Ch 8*^). To this course Zacharias, the father 
of John the Baptist, belonged (Lk I''). It is 
probable that this clan, and not an individual, is 
indicated in the lists of priests who ' went up with 
Zerubbabel ' (Neh 12'*). LXX omits this and other 
names in Neh 12 (they are supplied by x "• '•), and in 
the list of priests who ' sealed unto tlir covenant ' in 
the time of Nehemiah (10'') ('A^«d, li. ni. Of the 
21 names in Neh 10, 13 occur in nearly the same 
order in a list of 22 in ch. 12, while three others are 
veiy similar ; and of the names in these two lists 
9 are found in the names of David's course^. On 
the other hand, 'the book of the gent;iluuy of 
them that came up at the first' (Neh 7, Ezr 2) 
mentions only four families of priests, nor do there 
seem to have' been more in the time of Kzr f 10"*-). 

5. A son of Becher, son of Ben i a mi n. 1 Ch T^ 

6. RV retains 'Abiah,' 1 Ch 2-'. Wife of 
Hezron, eldest son of Perez, son ot' .Indaii. She 
was probably daughter of Machir (2 '' i. 

7. Wife of Ahaz, and mother of Ilc/cl<iah 
(2 Ch 291), named Abi, 2 K 18-. 11. r laiher 
Zechariah is possibly mentioned in Is S-. 

N. J. I>. WlllTK, 

ABIJAM.— See Abijau. 

ABILENE ('A/3tXij»'i)), Lk 3*.— A tetrarchy about 
A.D. 26 in Syria (Jos. Ant. xvili. vi. li», xrx. v. 1, 
XX. vii. 1 ; Wars, II. xi. 5), the cap. bein- at Abila 
on the N. slope of Hermon. The ruins of Abila 
surround a small village on the right bank of the 
river at Siik WAdy Bdrnda, ' the market of the 
valley of the Abana River.' The name has given 
rise to a local tradition (based on the Koran) that 
Cain here buried Abel, wlm^c torn)) is shown at a 
large tank cut in the rock on thi top of a cliff to 
the south. It is also preserve<l in the Latin text 
of Lucius Verus, on tlie N. side of the rock-cut 



pass.ifre of the Horn, road AY. of the town. The 
region of Abikiu- is also noticed in a Gr. text 
found in 1873 at Burkush on Hemion, showing 
that the district included the Antilebanon and 
Hermon, N.W. of Damascus. There is a ceme- 
tery at Abila of Kom. rook-cut tombs on the left 
of tlie stream, which here forms a cascade. They 
are adorned with bas-relief busts, and there are 
several tombstones with Gr. texts, gi\'ing the names 
of Lucius, Archelaiis, Phedistus, Antonia, and 
Philander. N. of the river and E. of the town are 
foundations of a small Rom. temple. 

Literature. — Reland, PaliUHna, p. 527 ff. ; Robinson, Later 
BR, pp. 479-4S1; Porter, Giant C%ties of Bashan, p. 352 f.; 
Schurer, HJP I. ii. 335-339 ; Conder, TerU-Work in Pal. p. 127 ; 
Furrer, Zeitsehrift des deutgehen Paldtttfia-Vereitu, viiL 40; 
^WP Special Papers ; Waddington, Interip. Grec et Lot. de la 
Syrie, g.v. ' AbUa.' C. R. COXDER. 

ABILITY.— Both in OT and NT ability occurs 
in two senses, which must be distinguished. 1. It 
signifies material capacity, resources, wealth, as 
Ezr 2^ 'They gave after their a. (Heb. 'ace as 
his hand may reach) into the treasuiy'; Lv 27* 
' According to the a. of him that vowed shall the 
priest value him." Cf. LXX of Lv 25*-"'* with. Ac 
11^ below ; and 

' Out of my lean and low ability 
I'll lend you something.* 

—Shakespeare, T. N. iii. 4. 

This is the meaning also of Ac 11^ 'Then the 
disciples, every man according to his a., deter- 
mined to send relief unto the brethren,' though 
the original is a verb, KadCis evropdro tis, meaning 
' ace. as each prospered.' 2. It signifies persoruu 
capacity, strength of body or of mind. Thus 
Dn 1^ • Such as had a. (rs) in them to stand in 
the kings palace ' ; Mt 25^ ' He gave talents . . . 
to every man according to his several a. {8^afus).' 
So Wis 13^*, Sir 3^ AVm. In modem Eng. a. is 
almost confined to mental capacity, though one 
hears it locally used of physical strength. In 
the sense of wealth the latest example found is 
in Goldsmitlis J'icar of Wakefield. 

J. Hastings. 

ABIMAEL (-Ntz??, perhaps = ' father is God,' 
but the force of the a is uncertain) was one of the 
Joktanids or (S.) Arabians (see art. JOKTAX), 
Gn 10=» (J), 1 Ch V^. Nothing further is known 
of this tribe, but it is markworthy that another 
name of the same peculiar formation, viz. TnyD3»t, 
has been found on the S. Arabian inscriptions ; see 
D. H. Muller in ZDMG 1883, p. 18. 

G. B. Gray. 

ABIMELECH (-^-zx 'Melech [Malki or Molech] 
is father'). — 1. A king of Gerar mentioned in con- 
nexion \^-ith the history of Abraham, Gn 20^"'" 
\lYy-^ (both E), and of Isaac, Gn 26^-ii-a-a (both J). 
With all their points of difference, it appears im- 
possible to resist the conclusion that we have in J 
and E two variants of the same story. In both the 
patriarch resorts to the same method of defence to 
protect himself from the same danger (20* 26") ; in 
both A. is righteously indignant at the deceit 
practised upon him {2!^ 26^") ; in both a treaty is 
entered into \vith A. (21*'^ 26**-) ; in both Phicol 
(■21— 26*) and Beersheba (21^ 26^) are mentioned. 
In all probability J has preserved the earlier form 
of the tradition, ace. to which Isaac, and not 
Abraham, was the patriarch concerned. The 
parallel stoiy in Gn 12i"-^ (where Pharaoh of 
Eg\pt takes the place of A. of Gerar) is also from 
a Jahwistic source, but scarcely from the same 
pen as 26''". If the title J^ be adopted for the 
latter, we may designate the other J*, whether we 
accept or not of Kuenen's theory that he edited a 
Juckean recension of J. 

LiTERATTRE. — Comm. of Dillm. and Del. on Gen. U. eit; 
Comill, Einleit.^ 54 f.; WUdeboer, Lit. d. A.T. 78, 138; 

Kautzsch u. Socio, Genen* ; W. B. Smith, OTJC^ 416 ; Kuenen. 
Hexaieueh, 231, 252. 

2. A king of Gath ace. to title of Ps 34'. Here 
A. is possibly a mistake for Achish (cf. 1 S 21"*-), 
a better known PhU. name being substituted for a 
less familiar one, or it may be that Abimelech is 
less a personal name than a title of Phil, kings like 
Egyp. Pharaoh (see Oxf. Heb. Lex. s.v.). 

3. This A. is generally reckoned one of the 
judges (so in Jg 1(?, but probably not by editor of 
9 nor in 1 S 12"). Ace. to Jg 8^' (R) he was a son 
of Gideon by a Shechemite concubine. Upon his 
father's death he gained over ' his mother's 
brethren ' in Shechem, and with the aid of a hired 
troop of ' vain and light fellows ' murdered all his 
70 brothers except the youngest, Jotham, who con- 
trived to escape. A. then ascended the throne 
and assumed the kingly title (9^"*). Jotham, leav- 
ing his place of concealment, spoke at Mt. Gerizim 
his well-known parable (w.'^*^), which was calcu- 
lated to sow dissension amongst the Shechemites, 
who were partly of Can. and partly of Isr. blood. 
After three years both sections were weary of 
the rule of A., who seems to have taken up his 
residence elsewhere (w.^*"*). Gaal, the leader 
of the Israelite faction (see, however, iloore on 
Jg 9^), made such headway in Shechem that 
Zebul, the governor, an adherent of A., was 
obliged to feign compliance with his designs. All 
the while, however, he was keeping A. secretly 
informed of the revolutionary movement, and sug- 
gesting methods of checking it (w.*"^). At lengui 
A. advanced to attack the city, and Gaal was 
completely routed, and after his defeat expelled 
by Zebul (vv.**"*^). In a second day's fight A. 
captored Shechem and put to the sword all the 
inhabitants that fell into his hands. A number 
having taken refuge in the temple of El-berith, 
he burned the building over their heads (vv.**"**). 
Sometime afterwards A. met his death while 
besieging Thebez. Bein^ struck down by a 
millstone which a woman nun» from the wall, he 
ordered his armour-bearer to kill him in order to 
escape the disgrace of perishing by the hand of a 
woman (w.**"^). 

The above is a reasonable and in general sdf- 
consistent narrative, but there are not a few points 
of detail where the course of events is involved in 
considerable obscurity. Zebul upon any theory 
plays a double part, but it is not quite certain 
whether there was to the last a complete under- 
standing between him and A. Kittel thinks there 
was, and supposes that Z. was put to death by the 
Shechemites after they discovered his treachery. 
WeUhausen, on the contrary, believes that he per- 
ished along with the Shechemites, A. having come 
to regard him as the real instigator of the revolt, 
and refusing to be propitiated by the oflering of 
Gaal as a scape-goat. It is further doubtful 
whether A. himself acted in the interests of the 
Can. or of the Isr., but at all events WeUhausen 
rightly remarks that ' the one permanent fruit of 
his acti\-ity was that Shechem was destroyed as a 
Can. city and rebuilt for Israel' (cf. 1 K 12'-*'). 

The story of A. in Jg 9 is the natural sequel of 
the version of Gideon's hist, contained in 8*"* (note 
also how the sentiments of Jotham's parable agree 
with 8-- ^, unless, indeed, these latter two verses 
are an 8th cent, interpolation). The narrative is 
one of the oldest in OT, belonging to the same type 
as the narratives concerning the minor judges. It 
is free from Deuter. touches and turns of expression, 
and may in its present form date from the earliest 
years of the monarchy. Its purpose is to show 
how the murder of Gideon's sons was avenged on 
A. and the Shechemites, who were practically his 
accomplices (^', cf. w. "• ^^^). Budde attributes 
the preservation of the story to E, who, however. 




himself composed the Jotham parable. Moore 
considers that it is possible to disentancle two 
narratives, (A) vv.»-»- «"*»• *«'•, cognate with which 
are w.^-^, (B) vv.****. The lirst of these he would 
assign to E, the second to J. Thi« scheme has the 
advantage of removing a good many difficulties 
presented by the chapter in its present form. 

LmaiATrRi!.— Cornill, A'»»i/<n7.« 8fl ; Wildeboer, Lit. d. A.T. 
33, 82, 282 ; Hrivcr. LUT 157 ; WcllhawBen, Comp. d. Ilex. 227 fif., 
863 ff.; BudtU-, liirM. «. ^S'a»»i. 117 ft.; KitU'l, UUt. qf lleb. ± 
13 n., 18 n., «2 n., SSff.; Moore, Judge*, 23711. 

4. A priest, the son of Abiathar, ace. to 1 Ch 
18", where, however, the reading of MT. ' A6ime- 
lech the son of Abiathar,' is oltviously a mistake 
for • Abiatluvr the .son of AAinidech ' (cf. 2 S 8" and 
notes on it by Budde in Haunt's Sacred Bks. of OT, 
and by Kittel in Kautzsch's J . T. ). See Auiathar. 

J, A. Selbie. 

ABINADAB (ai}"5«< 'father is generous'; LXX 
always '\fiuva.5<i^(X 'AfuvaSd^), except at 1 S 3P, 
where IJ (but not A) reads 'IwvaSd^).—!. Owner of 
the house whither the ark was brought bv the 
men of Kirjath-jearim after the catastrophe at 
BethSheinesh (1 S 7'), whence it was subsequently 
removed by David, 2 S G'*'-, 1 Ch 13^ During 
its stay here it was kept by Eleazar, son of 
Abinadab. 2. The seconti son of Jesse, specially 
mentioned in the narrative of 1 S 16 as not being 
the elect of J" for the kingdom. He accom- 
panied his brothers Eliab and Shammah to join 
Saul's army against the Philistines — 1 S 16^ 17'^, 
1 Ch 2". 3. A son of Sa*il slain in the battle of 
Mt. Gilboa, 1 S 31*= 1 Ch 10^ Otherwise men- 
tioned only in the genealogies of Chronicles, 1 Ch 
8" 9*". But cf. art. Isiivi. 4. On Abinatlab in 
1 K 4" (AV, not RV), see Bex-Abinadab. 

G. B. Gray. 

ABINOAM (cyj'^K 'father is plea.santness'), the 
father of Hiirak, is mentioned both in the song 
(Jg T)'-) and the prose narrative (Jg 4®-'^) of the 
campaign of Barak and Deborah against the 
Canaanites. G. B. Gray. 

ABIRAM (DT58 ' my father is the Exalted One'). 
— 1. Tiie -son of Eliah, a Keubenite, who with 
Dathan (which see) conspired against Moses 
(Nu 161*''-, Dt li«, Ps 106"). 2. The firstborn 
son of Hiel the Bethel ite, on whom the curse 
fell for rebuilding Jericho (1 K 16»*). 

G. Harford-Battersby. 

ABISHAG (3;?'5I<, meaning uncertain ; possibly 
'father has wandered'). — A very beautiful young 
Shunaintuitess who was brought to comfort David 
in his extreme old age, according to the advice of 
his servants, 1 K l-*-". After David's death, 
Abishag, as his father's widow, was asked in 
marriage by Adonijah; the request was refused 
by Solomon, who appears to have seen in it a 
renewal of Adonijuh's claim to the throne, 1 
K 2'-"-'' ; cf. \V. U. Smith, Kinship and Marriage, 
p. 89 f. G. B. Gray. 

ABISHAI {'V'Z9, but v?>< 2 S W\ 1 Ch 2i» 11«> 
Igu 15)11. li . ^ly father is Jesse'). — A. appears from 
1 Ch 2'" to have Ijeen the eldest son of Zeruiah, 
David's sister. More iinpetucms than the crafty 
Joab, but equally imi)lacable, ' hard' (2 S 3=» 19^), 
the first mention of Abishai ( 1 S 26*) presents him 
to us as already one of the most daring and devoted 
of David's followers. He volimteers to go down 
with David to Saul's camp by night, and is only 
prevented by David's veneration for the king s 
saered office from smiting Saul ' to the earth at one 
stroke.' We next find him (2 S 2»8--*)with his 
two brothers at that battle of (Jibeon which had 
such fatal results, first to Asahel, and ultimately 
to Abner, in whose treacherous murder by Joab, 
Abishai shared as joint avenger of bloo<l (2 S 

330. S9) The victory in the Valley of Salt over 
Edom (cf. 2 K 14^), which is ascribetl to David in 
2 S 8'^ (Syrians), and to Joab in I's 60 title 
(1 K ll"*-"), is attributed to Abishai in 1 Ch 18>-. 
In the war that was caused by Ilanun's insult to 
David's envoys, Joab gave Abishai command of 
the second division against the Ammonites, while 
he himself opposed the Syrians (2 S lO"-**). 
Abishai's character is well brought out in the story 
of David's flight, when he retorts the abuse of 
Shiinei in true Oriental .style, and is impatient 
to slay the oll'ender at once (2 S Hi"-"). Nor could 
Shimei's subsequent abject submLssion induce 
Abishai to forgive the man that had ' cursed the 
Lord's anointed' (19-'). In the battle with 
Absalom, AbLshai shared the command of David's 
army with Joab and Ittai (18--»-»0- In 2 S 208 
the name Joab should probably be substituted 
for that of Abishai (so Jos. Ant. vil. xi. 6, the 
Syr. vers., Well hausen, Thenivts, and Driver), and 
v!^ read as in the LXX : ' And there went out 
after him Abishai and Joab's men,' etc. It is 
natural to suppose that Abishai connived at the 
murder of Amasa by Joab, 2 S 20'" (so Josephus). 
His special exploits were, rescuing David from 
Ishbi-benob, 2 S 21", and slaying three hundred 
men, 23'*. These feats earned for him the first 

filace 'of the three in the second rank' (1 Ch IP', 
iVin), the other two being probably Joab and 
Benaiah ; the first three being Jashobeam, Eleazar, 
and Shammah. 

Abishai probably died before the rebellion of 
Adonijah. If he had been alive, he must have been 
mentioned among the leaders of either side. 

N. J. D. White. 
ABISHALOM.— See art. Absalom. 

ABISHUA (5i•^'5^(, meaning uncertain ; perhaps 
'father is wealth.' — 1. According to the genealo- 
gies of Chron., where alone the name occurs, 
son of Phinehas and father of Bukki, I Ch 6^'- *", 
Ezr 7'; cf. 1 Es S'-* and art. Ablsue. 2. A Ben- 
jamite ; presumably the name Avas that of a clan, 
since other names in the context are certainly clan 
names, 1 Ch 8* ; cf. Nu 26**^-. G. B. Gray. 

ABISHUR (iv.r'58 'father is a wall').— A Jerah- 
meelite described as ' son ' of Shammai ; Abiliail 
was his wife, and Aliban and Molid his children 

(I Ch 2-«'). 

ABISSEI (AV Abisei).— One of the ancestors of 
Ezra (2 Es 1-), called in 1 Ch 6* Abishua, and in 
1 Es 8"^ Abisue. 

ABISUE (LXX, B 'A|3e«cra£, A 'A/3«roua0 1 Es 8=, 
AV Abisum, is identical with Abisiiua. 

ABITAL (Vo"??* 'father is dew'), wife of David, 
to whom, during his residence in Hebron, she 
bore Shephatiah, 2 S 3*=1 Ch 3». 

ABITUB (3«'3K), 1 Ch 8", and ABIUD ('A^ioiJJ), 
Mt I'^. See Genealogy. 

ABJECT, now only an adj., was formerly also 
a subst. and a verb. As a subst., meaning the 
dregs of the people, abject is found in Ps 35" 
' The abjects (d'?}, IlVm ' smiters ') gathered them- 
selves together against me.' Cf. T. Bentley (1582), 
' O Almightie God : which raisest up the abjects, 
and exaltest the miserable from the dunghill,' 
Monu. Matr. iii. 3'28 ; G. Herbert, ' Servants and 
abjects flout me,' Temple : Sacrifice, 36. 

J. Hastings. 

ABNER, Tj^^i ("ij'5t? 1 S 14»), 'my father is 
Ner,' or ' is a lamp.' Saul's first cousin, accord- 
ing to 1 S 14*"* '^ (the more probable account), 




but uncle according to 1 Ch 8»-»9»-». Jos. 
follows Chronicles in Ant. VI. iv. 3, but Samuel in 
VI. vi. 6. The lan<ruage used of him by David, 
' Art not thou a valiant man, and who is like to 
thee in Israel ? ' (1 S 26") ; ' Know ye not that 
there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in 
Israel?' (2 S 3**), is not inconsistent with the re- 
corded facts of Abner's life, although the one 
speech was uttered in a tone of banter, and the 
other possibly dictated by motives of policy. As 
captain of tlie host (1 S 14** 17"), Abner sat next 
Saul at the banquet (1 S 20^), and lay near him in 
the camp (26*- "). A Jewish tradition (Jerome, Qu. 
Heb. in ioc.) states that the witch of Endor was 
Abner's mother. On Saul's death Abner secured 
for Ishbosheth the allegiance of all the tribes 
except Judah (2 S 2*"^*). He placed the feeble 
king at Mahanaim, while he himself conducted the 
war with David west of Jordan. One of the 
battles — that of the pool of Gibeon — is detailed on 
account of its fatal results. Here we have evidence 
of Abner's comparative mildness of character. It 
is possible that the preliminary encounter of the 
champions of the two armies was suggested by him 
in oraer to decide the claims of the rival houses 
without unnecessary bloodshed. Then we have 
his reiterated reluctance to slay Asahel, and, finally, 
his protest against the unnaturalness of the war : 
' Shall the sword devour for ever ? . . . How long 
shall it be ere thou bid the people return from 
following their brethren ? ' 

As the war proceedetl in David's favour ' Abner 
made himself strong in the house of Saul ' (2 S 3*). 
This rendering lends some plausibility to Ishbosh- 
eth's insinuation that he was aiming at the 
cro^>-n by a liaison with the late king's concubine 
(cf. 2 S 128 1621^ 1 K 213-25). The indignation, 
however, with which Abner repelled the charge, 
and the absence of self-seeking in his subsequent 
conduct, support the paraphrase of AV and RVm, 
' showed himself strong for (a) the house of Saul.' 

Be that as it may, the accusation alienated 
Abner, who forthwith declared that he would 
accomplish J'^s will by making David king over 
all Israel. He entered at once into negotia- 
tions both with Da^^d and the elders of Israel and 
Benjamin. David, on his part, astutelv demanded 
as a preliminary the restitution of ilichal, who 
would be at once a link with the house of Saul 
and a living memorial of David's early prowess. 
Ishbosheth's shadowy authority was made use of 
to carry out tthis condition. Abner was now 
hospitably entertained by DaWd at Hebron, and 
had scarcely departed to fulfil his engagements to 
Da\-id when Joab returned from a foray. Asahel's 
death was still unavenged ; here was a plausible 
pretext for ridding himself of a dangerous rival ; 
so Joab secretly recalled Abner, and with the 
connivance of Abishai treacherously murdered him 
in the gate of Hebron, a city of refuge. The 
enormity of this crime called forth from David a 
bitter curse (2 S 3"^) on the perpetrator, and was 
never forgotten by him (1 K 2*-**). Abner was 
buried in Hebron, amidst the lamentations of the 
nation. The king himself acted as chief mourner, 
and honoured the dead warrior with an elegy which 
pithily expresses the strange irony of fate by which 
the princely Abner died a death suitable to a pro- 
fane and worthless man. (Heb. ' was A. to die [i.e. 
ought he to have died] as Nabal dieth?') The dismay 
caused by Abner's death (2 S 4^) seems to prove 
that neither Ishbosheth nor his subjects in general 
had realised Abner's defection. The inevitable 
crisis was hastened, and by a curious chance the 
head of the murdered Ishbosheth was buried in 
Abners grave (2 S 4^). We learn from the 
Chronicler that Abner dedicated certain spoil for 
the repairs of the tabernacle (1 Ch 26^), and that 

his son Jaasiel was captain of Benjamin in David's 
reign (1 Ch 27«). N. J. D. White. 

ABODE.— 1. The pa^ tense of Abide (which 
see). 2. In Jn 14^ (' We will come unto him, and 
make our abode with him ') a. is tr. of the same 
word ifior^) which in Jn 14- is rendered Maxsiox 
(which see). J. Hastings. 

ABOMINATION.— Four separate Heb. words 
are thus rendered in OT (sometimes with the 
variation abominable thing), the application of 
which is in many respects very different. (1) The 
commonest of these words is ^^t^, which expresses 
most generally the idea of something loathed (cf. 
the verb, Mic 3®), esp. on religions grounds : thus 
Gn 43** 'to eat food with the Hebrews is an 
abomination to the Egyptians,' — a strong ex- 
pression of the exclusiveness with which the 
Egyptians viewed foreigners, esp. such as had no 
Tegaid for their religious scruples ; thus, on 
account of their veneration for the cow (which was 
sacred to Isis), they would not use the knife or 
cooking utensil of a Greek, which might have been 
employed in preparing the flesh of a cow as food 
(Hat. iL 41) ; Gn 46** ' every shepherd is an 
abomination to the Egyptians,' — shepherds, viz., 
were ranked, it seems, with the /3ovk6\o(, whose 
occupation was deemed a degrading one, who from 
living with their herds in reed cottages on the 
marshes were called marshmen, and who are 
depicted on the monuments as dirty, unshaven, 
poorly clad, and even as dwarfs and deformed (cf. 
Del. ad Ioc. ; Birch- Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. 1878, L 
288 f., iL 444 ; Wiedemann, Herodots ztneites Buck, 
1890, p. 371 f. ; Erman, Life in Anc. Eg. p. 439) ; 
Ex 8*^ <^> the Israelites are represented as unwilling 
to sacrifice 'the abomination of the Egyptians' in 
Egypt itself, with allusion, probably, "to animals 
which the Egyptians abstained religiously from 
sacrificing, though they were sacrificed freely by 
the Hebrews, as the cow, which was sacred to Isis, 
the buD, unless it was pronounced by the priests to 
be Kadapitt. or free from the sacred marks of Apis 
(Herodotus' statements on this point are not 
entirely borne out by the monuments, but there 
seems to be some foundation for them), sheep at 
Thebes, and goats [according to Wiedemann, an 
error for rams] in Mendes (Hdt. iL 38, 41, 42, 46 ; 
cf. Birch- Wilk. ii. 460, iiL 108 f., 304 f. ; Wiede- 
mann, I.e. pp. 180-182, 183, 187 f., 196 f., 218 f.). 

Two special usages may be noted : (a) the phrase 
Jehovah's abomination, of idolatry or practices 
connected with it, or of characters or acts morally 
displeasing to God, Dt 7* 12« 17» 18" 22* 23" t* 
25« 27»» (cf. 24*, Lk 16«), Pr 3*» IP*' 12^ 15»-»-» 
16* 17^'20^"'*' (comp. in a Phoen. inscription, ap. 
Driver, Samuel, p. xxvi, the expression ''Ash- 
toreths abomination,' of the violation of a tomb) ; 
{b) esp. in the plur., of heathen or immoral 
practices, principally in H and Ezk, as Lv 18**- *• ^• 
=»•» 20'^ Dt 131* i"» 17* 18»J3 20i«, Jer 7" 32®, 1 K 
143*, 2K16»21»-", Ezk5^"7^*-«-»8«-»-«etc. (43 
times in Ezk), rarely of an actual idol, 2 K 23^* (of 
Milcom), Is 44^9, and perhaps Dt 32". 

(2) Sj^, the technical term for stale sacrificial 
flesh, which has not been eaten within the pre- 
scribed time, only Lv 7^* 19*, Ezk 4" (where the 
prophet protests that he has never partaken of it), 
and (plur.) Is 65*. For distinction this might be 
rendered refuse meat ; the force of the allusion in 
Ezk 4", Is 65*, in particular, is entirely lost by the 
rendering ' abominable thing' of AV, RV. 

(3) ("g?, the technical term for the flesh of pro- 
hibited atninmls (see article Uxclean), Lv 7** 
1110-13. ». sj. 41. « (cf. the corresponding verb, v."- »• *» 
20*) : this sense of the word gives the point to 
Ezk 8^", Is 66*'. x^ would be best represented by 



detestation, or detestable thing (cf. detest for tlie 
verb, Dt 7'*'). Note that in l)t 14* abomination is 
n^V^B, not tl>e technical li^y used in Lv 11. 

(4) Pf!V, allied in etymology to (3), but in usage 
confined almost exclusively toobjects connected with 
idolatry, and chietlv a contemi)tuou8 designation 
of heathen deities themselves : lirst in Hos ^^° ' and 
became <&/e*^i/»on* like that which they loved '{Baal 
of I'eor, named just before) ; more frequently in 
writers of the age of Jer and Ezk, viz. l)t 29'* <"', 
Jer4'7*' ( = 32^'') 13" 16'», Ezk 5" 7* 11"-^' 20^-«'" 
37'°, 1 K 11* ' Milcom the detestation of the Ammon- 
ites,' V.'-', 2 K 23»»->» (not of Milcom), v.'*''; also 
Is 6G^ Zee 9^. In AV, liV, where this vt^ord 
occurs beside n?vV (No. 1), as Ezk 5" 7* (and Ezk 
37**, even where it stands alone), it is rendered for 
distinction detestable thing ; and either this or 
detestation would be the most suitable Eng. 
equivalent for it. S. R. DRIVER. 


^5Ai7Mtt -rrji ipw^'^f'^^), -^^t 24'^ Mk 13'*, 
• spoken of by Daniel the prophet,' the appearance 
of which, 'standing iv Tdirif) ayl(p (Mt), or 6wov oi/ 
dei (Mk),' is mentioned by Christ as the signal for 
the tlight of Christians from Judaea, at the time of 
the approaching destruction of Jerus. The Gr. 
phrase is borrowed from Dn 9-'' LXX ^diXvyfta rwv 
ipvudiaeuf (so Theod.), 11*' LXX p5^\vyna 
iprjfidxTeui CTheotl. /35. ■q<f>avL<Tfiivov), 12" LXX rb 
BSiXvyna riji ^prifiuffeui (Theod. /35. ep. ) ; cf. 8'* (LXX, 
Theod. ) i) ifiaprla ip-qtiuictui. The Heb. in the first 
of these passages is D?k'9 dtpp*, in the second jnis^'n 
ccr9, in the third at^ ]"--?v, in the last cc'r iVfn. 
ppp is the word explained under Abomination (4), 
as being often the contemptuous designation of a 
heathen god or idol, ccc'9 and Dpf are, however, 
ditiicult. DCfc'D elsewhere (only Ezr 9*-*) means 
horrified ; c^k' means usually desolate (as La l"*- '"), 
though it might also (as ptcp. of or^v, Ezk 26'« 27'® 
al.) mean horrified as well: in Dn, however 
(snijusiiiL,' the text to be sound), the exigencies of 
thf >-( n>c liave obliged many commentators to sup- 

{losc that the Poel con jug. has a trans, force ; hence 
IV 9'-'' ' one that maketh desolate ' ; IP' ' and they 
shall profane the sanctuary, even the fortress, and 
shall take away the continual burnt-offering, and 
they shall set up the abomination that maketh 
desolate ' ; 12" ' from the time that the continual 
bumt-offering shall be taken away, and the 
abomination that maketh desolate set up ' ; so 8'* 
C5fe' iVfv? ' the transgression that makethdesolate' (the 
form cck* might just \)e a ptcp. Poel with the d 
dropped ; Ges.-K. §§ 55 K. 1, 52. 2 R. 6). In spite, 
however, of the uncertainty as regards ccr (or 
CDPC), the general sense of 11" and 12" is clear. 
Dn 11*1-*" deals with the history of Antiochus 
Epiphanes, and v." refers to the desecration of the 
temple by the troops of Antiochus, the subsequent 
suspension of the daily bumt-ofl'ering and other 
religious services (which lasted for tbree years), 
and to the erection on 15 Chislev, B.C. 168, of a 
small idol-altar (/3«;tA») upon the Altar of burnt- 
ofleriiig (1 Mac !»-«•). 12" (like 8'*) is another 
reference to the same events. It is remarkable, 
now, that in 1 Mac 1" the idol-altar is called by 
exactly the same name that is used in the Bk. 
of J)n- —<^KoS6nt}<raf ftS^Xi^y/xa iprjfiuxrfwi iirl rb 
OwnaaH^piov (cf. 0"). Dn tf-*^ is very difUcult : but, 
as the reference in NT is rather to 11" and 12", 
it need not here be further considered ; LXX, 
Theod., however, it may be noted, have kclI ivl rb 
Itpbf pSiXiryfia rQy iprffulxrtuv. Of the perplexing 
exprc8.sion C2c ppc, now, a clever ami plausible 
explanation has been suggested by Nestle (ZATW 
1884, p. 248 ; cf. Clieyne, Origin of tfie Psalter, p. 
105 ; JBevan, Dan. p. 193), viz. that it is a con- 
temptuous allusion to onsr hii2 BeuU of heaven, a 

title found often in Phten. and (with pec for otsr) 
Aram, inscriptions, and the Sem. equivalent of 
the Gr. Z* uj : according to 2 Mac 6^ Antiochus 
desired to make the temple a sanctuary of Zeus 
'OM/iirios, — as his coins show (Nestle, Marginalien, 
p. 42, who cites Babelon, Les Jiois de Si/rie, pp. xiv, 
xlviii), his patron deity, — Avho in the Syr. vers, of 
the same passage is actually called ycv i^2 Baal of 
heaven. Upon this view, we are released from the 
necessity of searching for a meaning of ccc in 
exact accordance witn the context ; the /3w^6j 
(with, possibly, an image connected with it) erected 
by the Syrians upon the Altar of bumt-ofiering 
was termed derisively by the Jews the ' desolate 
abomination,' the 'abomination' being the altar 
(and image?) of Zeus (Baal), and 'desolate' 
(shomem) being just a punning variation of 
' heaven ' (shdmaim). The GTr. trs. of Dn and 1 Mac, 
in so far as they supposed the expression to mean 
pd^Xvyfia iprjfiwffews, no doubt understood the 
idolatrous emblem to involve, by its erection, the 
desertion of the temple by its usual worshippers, 
and ultimately its actual 'desolation' (see 1 Mac 
438). IP' and 8'» (the subst. with the art., the 
ptcp. without it), and still more (if, as is probable, 
the reference be to the same idolatrous emblem) 
9^ (the subst. plur., the ptcp. sing. ), are grammatic- 
ally difficult ; but the text in these passages is 
perhaps not in its original form (cf. Bevan). 

As to the meaning of the expression in the 
prophecy of Christ, it is very difficult to sneak with 
confidence. It would be most naturally under- 
stood (cf. Spitta, Offenb. des Joh. 493-496) of some 
desecrating emblem, similar in general character to 
the altar or image erected by Antiochus, and of 
which that might be regarded as the prototype : 
but nothing exactly corresponding to this is 
recorded by history ; the order which Caligula 
issued for tne erection in the temple of a statue of 
himself, to which divine honours were to be paid, 
being not enforced (Jos. Ant. XVIII. viii. 8). The 
three most usual explanations are — (1) the Rom. 
standards, to which sacrifices were oflered by the 
Rom. soldiers in the temple, after it had been 
entered by Titus (Jos. 2?/ VI. vi. 1) ; (2) the desecra- 
tion of the temple by the Zealots, who seized it and 
made it their stronghold, shortly before the city 
was invested by Titus [ib. IV. iii. 6-8, cf. vi. 3 end) ; 
(3) the desolation of the temple-site by the heathen, 
at the time of its capture by Titus (so Meyer). 
The term standing (which points to some concrete 
object) is a serious objection to the second 
and third of these explanations ; it is some 
objection, though not perhaps a fatal one, to the 
first, that it places the signal for flight at the very 
last stage of the enemy's successes, when even the 
dwellers in Juda;a (in view of whom the words are 
spoken) would seem no longer to need the warning. 
The erection of the imperial statue in the Temple 
was, however, only averted in the first instance 
by the earnest representations of the procurator 
Petronius and of King Agrippa I., and afterwards 
by Caligula's own untimely death (Schiirer, HJP 
I. ii. 99 f.): the emperors order caused ";reat 
alarm among the Jews, who even after his death 
(A.D. 41) continued to fear lest one of his successors 
should revive and enforce it (Pfleiderer, Das 
Urchrist. pp. 403-407; Mommsen, Provinces, ii. 
196 fl'., 20311'.) ; hence (as even the first explanation 
mentioned above leaves something to be desired) 
it may not be an unreasonable conjecture * that 
the language of the original prophecy was more 
general, and that, during the years of agitation and 
tension which preceded the final struggle of A.p. 
70, it was modified so as to give more definite 
expression to such apprehensions ; the masc. 

• The writer ia indebted for this suggestion to his friend, Prof 
I Sanday. 




fmjKora, which in Mk 13^* is the best reading (k 
BL ; so RV, ' standing where he ought not '), would 
also lend itself more readily to this explanation 
than to any of those pre\'iously mentioned. * The 
supposition (Weiss) that the army of the heathen 
Romans is referred to, involves an unnattiral 
application, both of the expression ' abomination of 
desolation,' and of the verb ' standing.' In the 
parallel passage of Lk (21*) the phraseology of the 
earlier synoptists seems to have been not only (as 
in so many other cases) re-cast, but also coloured 
by the event ('when ye see Jerus. encircled by 
armies, then know that her desolation hath drawn 
nigh ') ; a paraphrase such as tliis, however, cannot 
fairly be deemed an authoritative interpretation of 
tlie expression used in Mt and Mk.f 

S. R. Driver. 
ABOUT. — As an adv. about is used in AV in 
the following obsolete expressions : — 1. To lead 
about or go about = roam about, circuitously. 
The verb is mostly 2^5, which simply means to 
' turn ' : Ex 13'^ ' Grod led the people about, 
through the way of the wilderness ' ; Jos 16^ ' The 
border went about (RV 'turned about') eastward'; 
1 S 15'- ' He set him up a place, and is gone about 
and passed on ' ; Ec 2^ 'I went about (RV 
' turned about,' i.e. considered my past life) to 
cause my heart to despair.' 2. To go about = here 
and there, up and down : Jer 31- ' How long wilt 
thou go about (RV 'hither and thither'), thou 
backsliding daughter ? ' 3. To go about = to seek, 
attempt : Jn 7^" ' Why go ye about to kill Me ? ' 
RV gives ' seek ' in Jn T^^- ^, Ac 2l3i, Ro Kf, 
• assay ' in Ac 24® 26^, and keeps ' go about ' in 
Ac 9^. i. To cast about — to turn round : Jer 41^^ 
' So all the people . . . cast about and returned.' 
5. Thereabout = about that: Lk 24^ 'They were 
much perplexed thereabout.' J. Hastixgs, 

ABRAHAM. — The narrative of the patriarch 
Abraham is contained in Gn 11^-25'*, and, as it 
stands before us, consists of a series of con- 
secutive stories or scenes from the patriarch's 
life. It makes no pretence of being a complete 
biography. It may be doubted whether the 
compiler of the Hex. had any intention of pre- 
serving all the extant traditions respecting A. 
His purpose seems rather to have been to select 
from the traditions current among the Hebrews 
such narratives as would best illustrate the origin 
of the Isr. nation, and would best set forth how 
the divine Providence had shielded the infancy of 
the chosen race, and had predestined it both to 
inherit the land of Can. and to be a blessing 
among the nations of the earth. As would he 
natural under the circumstances, the traditions 
relating to A. have special reference to sacred 
localities in Pal. ; but unfortunately they do not 
afford any very precise data for determining the 
age in which he lived. The compiler gives us a 
picture of A. which he derived apparently from 
three groups of tradition. We will first briefly 
summarise the narrative, and then indicate the 

• Those critics who (as Keim, Jems of Saz. v. 237-239 ; cf. 
Holtzmanu, Handkomm. 1. 259 f., Einl. zuin ST^, p. 3S3 f., with 
the references) regard Mt 24i5-2i, Mk 13l-«-2r, as an independent 
Jewish (or Jewish-Christian) apocalypse originating shortly before 
A.D. 70, which has been incorporated with our Lord's discourse, 
can, of course, adopt stiU more readily the same explanation ; 
but it is difficult to think that even these verses, though par- 
ticular phrases may have been modified in the course of oral 
transmission, are without a substantial basis in the words of 

t Bousset (Der AntichrUt. 1S95, pp. 14, 93, 106 f., 141 f.), 
treating Mt 24i5ff. (=Mk 131* S-) as purely eschatological, sup- 
poses the reference to be to the future Antichrist, who is 
frequently described (on the basis of 2 Th 2*) as sitting in the 
Temple, and receiving divine honours (e.g. by Irenaeus, v. 25. 1, 
30. 4 ; see further passages in Bousset, p. 1(M f .) ; but it may be 
doubted whether the ^iew of Mt 2415 "-, upon which this ex- 
plajoation depends, is correct. 

portions which belong to the separate sources of 
tradition, according to the generally accepted 
results of critical analysis. 

Abram, Nahor, and Haran are sons of Terah. 
Their home is in Ur of the Chaldees (Gn 1 !*■**), 
where Haran dies. A. marries Sarai, who was his 
half-sister (Gn 20^2^ ^ ^nd his wife, with their 
nephew Lot, Haran's son, accompany Terah, who 
migrates from Ur of the Chaldees, and journeys to 
Haran, where Terah dies (Gn 11^- », Jos 24-). 
Terah is said to have had Canaan in view when he 
set out upon his journey (Gn IP'). A. in Haran 
receives the divine command to quit his country 
and kindred, and accompanied by Lot enters the 
land of Can. He traverses the whole country : 
and we are told in particular of Shechem and 
Bethel being places at which he halted, and, as his 
custom was, built an altar to J " (Gn 12'-*). Driven 
by a famine, A. journeys to Egypt, where, in 
cowardly fear for his own life, he says that Sarai 
is his sister, and does not acknowledge her as his 
wife. The princes of Egypt bring the report of 
Sarai's beauty to Pharaoh king of Egypt, who 
sends to fetch her, has her placed in' his own 
harem, and loads A. with presents on her account. 
The intervention of J " alone delivers the mother of 
the promised race from her peril. Pharaoh learns 
of tne wrong he is doing, through the plagues 
which befall his house. In great dudgeon he 
summons A., justly reproaches him for the decep- 
tion, and dismisses him and his belongings from 
Egypt (12i«-«). 

A. and Lot return from Egypt to the district of 
Bethel ; but their possessions in flocks and herds 
have greatly increased. It proves impossible for 
two such large droves to keep close together. 
Constant disputes break out between the retainers 
of the two chiefs. It is e>'ident that they must 
separate. A., though the elder, proposes the 
separation, and oflers Lot the choice as to the 
region to which he shall go. Lot chooses the rich 
pasture-land of the Jordan valley, and departs. 
A. remains on the soil which has been promised 
him, and receives as a reward for his "unselfishness 
a renewal of the divine prediction that his de- 
scendants shall inhabit it as their own (13). A. 
removes to Hebron (13'*), and while he is encamped 
there war breaks out in the immediate neighbour- 
hood. The kings of the towns in the Jordan 
valley rebel against Chedor - Laomer (Kudur - 
Lagamar), the great Elamite king. The king of 
Elam with his vassals, the kings of Shinar, Ellasar, 
and Goyyim (?), march against the rebels, defeat 
them in a great battle, and retire, carr\-ing off 
many prisoners and rich booty from Sodom and 
Gomorrah. Lot is one of the captives. A. is no 
sooner apprised of this than he arms his 318 
retainers, and summons to his aid Mamre, Eshcol, 
and Aner, the three chieftains of the Hebron 
district, with whom he is confederate. The com- 
bined force overtakes the victorious army at Dan, 
in the N. of Canaan, surprises them by a night 
attack, routs them, and recovers Lot and the 
other prisoners, and all the booty. On the way 
back A. is met in the plain of Shaveh by the king 
of Sodom, and Melchizedek king of Salem. Mel- 
chizedek solemnly blesses A. for his heroic deed ; 
and the Heb. patriarch, in recognition of Mel- 
chizedek's priestly office, gives him a tenth of the 
spoU. On the other hand, he proudly declines 
the ofler which the king of Sodom makes, that A. 
should receive the spoil for himself ; he asks only 
for the share that would compensate his con- 
federates, Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner, and their 
men (14). 

A., who by reason of his childlessness cannot 
entertain hopes of the. fulfilment of the di\ine 
promise, receives in a special vision assurance of 




the great future of the race that shall spring from 
him. By the gracious condescension of the 
Almighty, a covenant is made by sacrifice between 
the patriarch and God ; and during the night, 
when a deep sleep has fallen upon A., he learns 
the future destiny of his descendants, and the 
vision is ratified by an outward symbol (15""''''^'*^). 
Sarai, who has no hope of having children, per- 
suades A. to take llagar, her Ejjfyp. maidservant, 
as a concubine. Hagar, finding herself with 
child, is insolent towards Sarai, who thereupon 
treats her so harshly that Hajrar flees into the 
desert. She is there stopped t)y an angel, and 
sent Imck, comforted by the promise respecting the 
child tliat is to be bom. This is Ishmael (16). 
But Ishmael is not the promised son. Thirteen 
more years elapse before God appears again to A., 
and again promises that his descendants will be a 
mighty nation. In pledge of the fulhlment of his 
word, he changes Abram's name to Abraham, 
Sarai's to Sarah, and ordains that the rite of 
circumcision sliall be the sign of the covenant 
between God and the house of Abraham. Tlie 
promise that Sarah shall have a son, and the com- 
mand to call his name Isaac, prepare us for the long- 
exi)ected consummation (17). But it is not to be 
yet. Another great scene intervenes, to try, as it 
were, the patriarcli's faitli, and make proof of the 
character of the father of the Heb. race. J", accom- 
panied by two angels, appears in human form to 
A. as he sits before his tent by the oaks of Mamre. 
A.'s offer of hospitality is accepted ; and as the 
three strangers partake of the meal, the one wlio 
is J" to A. a son by Sarah, who overhears, 
and laughs incredulously (18'"'*). The two angels 
proceed to Sodom and Gomorrali ; J" remains with 
A., and di'jcloses to him the approaching destruc- 
tion <if 'tilt- cities of the plain.' A. pathetically 
iiit( ici'dcs, and obtains the assurance that if but ten 
righteous be found in the city it shouM lie spared 
for their sake (18^*"^). J" leaves A. ; and then 
ensues the description of the destruction of Sodom 
and Gomorrah, tne vividness of which is enhanced 
by the brief reference to A., who in the morning 
looks forth fronj the hill country of Hebron, 
where he had stood during his colloquy with J", 
and sees thence the reek of the smoke rising as 
from a furnace (19**). Strangely out of place 
though it seems, we find interposed at this point 
the story how A. journeyed to the South-land or 
Negeb, and dwelt in the territory of Gerar, where 
Abimelech was king, and how A. once more fears 
for his life on account of Sarah's beauty, repre- 
sents her to be his sister, and temporarily loses ner, 
when she is taken to Abimelech s harem. As in 
the Egyp. story, Sarah is kept from harm by a 
8i>ecial visitation ; Abimelech is warned by God, 
releases Sarah, and rebukes A. (20). 

At length the long-promised son is bom to A. of 
Sarah ; he is circumcised the 8th day, and receives 
the name of Isaac (2P''). Sarah takes offence at 
the siglit of Ishmael playing with Isaac ; and A. is 
instructed by God to yield to Sarah's demand, and 
dismiss both Hagar and Ishmael from his tent (2F). 
A.'s prosperity and success induce Abimelech to 
seek alliance with the patriarch. A covenant 
between them is struck ; the well, which Abi- 
melech's servants had taken by force from A., is 
■ restored to him, and receives the name of Beer- 
Sheba. A. dwells for some time in Phil, territory, 
encamped in the vicinity of the well (2l*"--*»). 

Some years later, when Isaac has grown to be a 
lad, comes the last trial of A.'s faith. God orders 
him to sacrifice his only son upon a lofty hill, 
distant three days' joumev from his place of 
encampment. He does not hesitate. All is done 
in perfect obedience ; the knife is raised to slay 
Isaac, when a voice from heaven is heard. God 

wishes not a hair of the lad's lieatl to suffer ; He is 
satisfied with tliis proof of tlie liatriarch's absolute 
trust in God, his readiness to sacrifice tliat which 
was most precious in his eyes. A ram is saci-ificed 
in the stead of Isaac ; and the holy covenant 
between J" and A. is ratified anew (22''^*). 

Then Sarah dies; and A., whose seed is to 
possess the whole land, has to purchase a burial- 
place. The field and cave of Machpelah at Hebron 
IS the portion of ground which he buys with 
all due formality from Ephron the Hittite ; and 
there he buries Sarah (23). 

Feeling his days drawing to a close, A. causes 
his steward to swear not to let Isaac take to wife 
one of the daughters of tlie land, and sends him to 
Haran, where he finds llebekah, and brink's lier 
back to be Isaac's wife (24). 

It is strange next to read that A. takes i\<turaii 
to be his wife, and becomes the father of six sons, 
the patriarchs of Arabian tribes (25^"'*). But at 
the age of 175 he dies, and is buried in the cave of 
Machpelah (25^-"). 

The foregoing outline shows the truth of what 
has been remarked above, that the life of A. in the 
Bk of Gn is not so much a consecutive biography 
as a series of scenes derived from groups of Heb. 
tradition, and loosely strung together. How far 
the three main groups of patriarchal narrative — 
the J, E, and P — overlapped one another we 
cannot say, but the fact that the existing account 
is derived from different sources sufficiently 
explains some of the chief difficulties and dis- 
crepancies that strike the ordinary reader. 

J.— The narrative of J opens with A. being in Haran, and 
migrating with Lot to Can. at the command of J". 

It mentions A.'s nomadic movements in Can., and the altars 
at Bethel and Shechem. It records the separation of A. and 
Lot, and A.'s sojourn at Hebron. 

It describes A.'s journey to Egypt, and his return to the S. of 

It contains the promises made to A., and the covenant in eh. 
15. It records the marriage with Hagar, Ilagar's fliyla. and lliu 
birth of Islimael. 

It gives the long epic narrative of the visit of the three men 
to A. ; A.'s intercession ; and the overthrow of the cities of the 

It narrates the birth of Isaac, and the mission of A.'s servant 
to Haran. 

J = 121 4. 6-133. Ml«. 12b-18 15. 164-14 ig. 19 (exc. V.29) 21. (par- 
tially) 24. 

E. — The narrative of E opens with A.'s wandering to and fro, 
with Lot, in Can. It reproduces, perhaps from some separate 
source, an account of the war between Chedor-I.4ionier and the 
rebel 'cities of the plain,' A.'s rescue of his nephew, and Mel- 
chizedek's blessing. 

It describes the blessing pronounced upon the patriarch in 
ch. 15. It records A.'s sojourn at Gerar, and the peril to which 
Sarah was exposed at the court of Abimelech (20). It contains 
an account of the birth of Isaac ; and the mention of the 
banishment of Hagar and Ishmael implies that it also included 
an account of Ishmael's birth. It records the alliance of A. with 
Abimelech at Beersheba. And, so far as A. is concerned, con- 
cludes with the story of the sacrifice of Isaac. 

E = 14. (possibly) 15. (partially) 20. 21«-32 22. 

P.— The narrative of P is a mere skeleton outline of facts. A. 
is Terah's son. Terah, with A. his son and Lot his nephew, 
leave Ur-Casdim, and set out for Can. ; they stay at Haran, 
where Terah dies, 205 years old. A., 76 years old, accom}Minied 
by Lot, journeys to Can. A. settles near Momre ; Lot goes E. 
to the Jordan valley. A. marries Hagar ten j'ears .-ifti-r enter- 
ing Can. ; Ishmael is bom in A.'s 86U1 year. In his !»Oth year 
(Jod makes a covenant with him, and ordains the rite of circum- 
cision, changing his name to Abraham, and Sarai's to Sarah. 
A. laughs at the idea of Sarah having a son ; and the son to be 
bom to him is to be called Isaac. In his 100th year A. has a 
son Isaac, who is circumcised. Sarah dies at Hebron 127 years 
old, and A. purchases the cave of Machrielah for a l)ur\iMg-place. 
He himself dies at the age of 175, ana is buried by' Isaac and 
Ishmael in the cave. 

P=13«. lib. 12 IQl 3. 15. 16 171-27 102B 2111'. 2b-5 23. 26"-17. 

The combination of the three strata of tradition has only in a 
few instances led to apparent inconsistencies. Tlic J narrative, 
which makes Haran A.'s native country ((in 12. 24), contains no 
allusion to Ur-Caadim. J's narrative contains the story of A.'s 
cowardice in Egypt ; it is E's narrative which contains the story 
of his cowardice at the court of Abimelech. The narratives of 
J and _E, which stn-ak of Sarah's beauty attracting the notice of 
Egyptians and Philistines, do not mention the ages of A. and 
Sarah. According to J, A. very prob. had died before the return 
of the servant with Rebekah, since V3K should prob. 1« read 




for icx in 24^ ; for we can hardly suppose that Isaac's mooming 
for his mother would have lasted for three yean. The mention 
of A.'s marriage with Keturah in the folL <dL is derired from a 
different source. 

The foil, are the chief difficulties arising from 
the Abraham narrative : — 

1. The Home of A.'s People. — From the fact that 
Terah is said to have lived at Ur-Casdim, and 
that Ur has been identified by Assyriologists with 
Uru, the modem Mugheir, in S. Bab., the con- 
clusion has very commonly been drawn that A. 
migrated first from Chaldea. This, however, 
deiJends upon the correctness of the identification 
of Ur-Casdim with Uru, which has been much dis- 
puted on the grounds, (1) that the genealogy of Gn 
11^'^ brings the Sem. race as far as Mesopotamia, 
from wliich the next movement in the direction of 
Can. would be to Haran ; (2) that the name 
Casdim was applied to an Armenian tribe ; and (3) 
that it does not appear in connexion with S. Bab. 
until much later (upon the whole controversy see 
Kittel, Hist, of Hebrews, Eng. tr. i. 180f. ; Dillmann, 
Genesis, p. 214 f. As to the position of Ur-Casdim, 
see art. Ue OF THE Chaldees). The common 
early Heb. tradition seems to be expressed in Gn 
24, according to which A.'s kindred were the 
dwellers in N. Mesopotamia ; and it is this belief 
which also is reiterated in the story of Jacob. Cf. 
' A Svrian (i.e. Aramaean) readv to perish was my 
father' (Dt 26'). Whether Cr-Casdim is to be 
placed in X. Mesopotamia or in Chaldea, the 
impression remains that ' J ' believed A's home and 
kindred to have been in Haran. 

2. T/te Character of the Narrative related in Gn 
14. — There appears to be no reason to question the 
hist, probability of an Elamite campaign such as is 
here described. There is nothing inherently im- 
probable in the event as has sometimes, in some 
quarters, been asserted. A. did not defeat the 
Elamite army in a pitched battle ; he made a night 
attack, fell upon an unsuspecting foe, and recovered 
prisoners and baggage, — a very different exploit 
from the conquest of Damascus, which late legend 
assigned to him. The primitive invasion of Ch©ior- 
Laomer has been claimed by some Assyriologists 
for an approximate date of 2150 (so Hommel, Bab.- 
Ass. Gesch. p. 3) ; and the invasion of W. Asia by 
an Elamite will naturally be associated with the 
Elamite empire of that remote time. But upon 
what principle the events of A.'s life can be carried 
back to the 22nd cent. B.C. has not vet been 
.satisfactorily explained. Biblical chronofogy does 
not suggest the interval of nearly a thousand years 
between A. and the Exodus, 

3. The Promises made to A. are found eight 
times repeated, (i.) Gn 12'"» (ii-) 12^ (i") 13" (iv.) 15 
(v.) 17 (vi.) 18 (vii.) 21^^ (viii.) 22i«. The promises 
fall under three main heads, (a) the land of Can. 
shall be possessed by the seed of A.; (b) the seed of 
A. shall become a mighty nation ; (c) A. shall have 
a son bom of Sarah, and the son Ls to be called 
Isaac. The number of times that the promise 
appears is due to the compilers having selected this 
as the most conspicuous feature in the narrative 
of A. in each of the sources of tradition. The 
seemingly strange fact, that the narrative in ch. 
17 should take no notice of the mention of the 
same promise in ch. 15, is at once accounted for 
when it is seen to be an instance of the manner in 
which the dift'erent narratives overlap one another. 
The promises, contained in the different traditions, 
seemed to the compiler so important in view of the 
general purpose ot hLs book, that, at the risk of 
considerable repetition, he has incorporated them 
all. These promises ever ranked among the 
religious privileges of Israel (Ro 9*). They pro- 
claimed God's covenant with His people, according 
to which He required of them simple obedience and 

justice (Gn 18") ; they also annoimced that through 
Israel all nations should be blessed. 

4. The Sacrifice of Isaac marks the crowning 
event in the life of A. Obviously, it must rank as 
the surpjissin^ act of the patriarch's faith in God. 
But a difficulty arises in some minds from the 
wickedness of the act which God at first commands 
A. to do. Even though He never intended A. 
eventually to execute the terrible command, still is 
it consistent with divine goodness and justice to 
issue an order, to obey which seemed to have the 
result of placing blind trust in a positive command 
above the reasonable recognition of the natural 
demands of love, mercy, and justice? But there 
are two considerations which cut the ground from 
beneath this objection. (1) We are tempted to 
assume that in the patriarchal narrative the voice 
of God is an audible external communication. But 
then, as now, God speaks in different ways, and by 
conscience most directly. The question put by A's 
conscience was whether his complete trust in Grod 
extended even to the readiness to surrender his 
only son ; it was in the truest sense a word of God 
to A. (2) That the answer to this questioning was 
given in the shape of human sacrifice on a mountain 
top, illustrates the importance of bearing in mind 
the imperfect development of the moral conscious- 
ness in that remote period. Human sacrifice was 
frequently practised in Sem. races. If the wor- 
shippers of other Sem. deities were ready to 
sacrifice their firstborn to their gods, was A. to be 
behind Assyria, Ammon, and Moab in devotion ? 
The moral standard of the age would not be 
shocked at a deed too fatally common. The ideas 
of mercy and justice were, in that period, low, and 
needed to be raised. To propitiate the Deity by 
child murder was regarded as the height of religions 
devotion. The narrative, therefore, fulfils the 
twofold object of ^ving the crowning proof of A.'s 
absolute faith in J" ; and further, of demonstrating 
the moral superiority of faith in J" over the 
religious customs of other Sem. races. J' forbade 
the sacrifice of the firstborn : J' upheld the instinct 
implanted in human nature which shrunk in 
horror from the act. He taught that J " had no 
pleasure in the infliction of suffering upon the 
innocent ; that the character of J" was raised above 
that of the heathen gods by higher love and truer 

iL A. Df THE History of Israel. — The 
attempt has been made to deprive the story of A 
of all hist, value, and to represent the patriarch 
either as a mythical personage or as the typical 
impersonation of the virtues of the religious Isr. ; 
but as yet no evidence has been found to connect 
the name of A with that of a tribal deity, while 
the endeavour to find in his story a philosophical 
description of abstract qualities seems to pre- 
suppose a stage of literary development to which 
the materials of the Hex. can make no claim, and 
to desiderate a literary imity which those materials 
emphatically contradict. 

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that 
recollections of the nomadic age, committed to 
writing (in the form that has come do^vn to us) in 
a post-Mosaic era, and eWdently strongly coloured 
by the teaching of the prophets of J", are likely 
to have preserved the hist, facts of the remote 
past in a form in which personal details are inex- 
tricably intertwined with racial movements, and, 
for simpUcitys sake, the destinies of a future 
nation are anticipated in the features of family 

According to this view, A. was the leader of a 

great nomadic movement of the Hebrews (Gn 10^ 

14'*), who migrated from Mesopotamia into Canaan. 

These Hebrews penetrated as far as Egypt (Gn 12), 

I but for the most part established themselves in the 




S. of Canaan, and in Hebron and Beersheba formed 
friendly relationships with the dwellers of the 
land (Gn 14. 21**). The story of Lot seems to 
indicate that the peoples of Ammon and Moab had 
originally belonged to the Heb. migration which 
was led by A., and, having separated themselves 
from their comrades, occupied the territory of 
the Rephaim, the Emim, and the Zamzummim 
(Dt 2"- '»-■•"). 

Again, it is impossible to resist the conclusion 
that some of the references to Ishmael and the 
allusion to Keturah contain an Isr. picture of the 
relationship of the Arabian tribes and clans to the 
Heb. stock rather than the record of personal 
history. The EkyP- origin of Hagar (Gn 16') and of 
Ishmaol's wife (Gn 2r'*^) will then indicate that the 
new settlors received into their community a con- 
siderable admixture of an Egyp. element at the 
time when they dispersed throughout N. Arabia. 
The fact that ' the sons of Nahor ^(Gn 22»'-«), ' the 
sons of Ishmael ' (Gn 25'^''*), ' the sons of Edom ' 
(Gn 36"'"), form groups of twelve, and that ' the 
sons of Keturah ' tnus form a half-group of six, is 
an additional sign of the probability that the 
record is not only that of the domestic life of a 
family, but also that of the political distribution of 
a race. 

While this consideration must modify the accept- 
ance of a uniform literal historicity for the narra- 
tive of A., it is not incompatible with the view 
that in A. we have the great leader of a racial 
movement, and one who left his mark upon his 
fellow-tribesmen, not only by the eminence of his 
superior gifts, but by the distinctive features of his 
religious life, the traditional features of which were 
the devotion to one God, the abandonment of the 
polytheism of his ancestors, and the adoption of 
circumcision as the symbol of a purer cult. 

iii. A. IN THE Theology of OT.— The scattered 
reminiscences of the patriarchs were collected and 
compiled, even more for the purpose of illustrating 
the fundamental principles of the Isr. revelation 
than with the object of retailing any exhaustive 

The religion of Israel dates, according to OT, 
from A., not from Moses. A.'s servant addresses 
•I" as the God of his master A. (Gn 24'=*) ; J" is to 
Isaac the God of A. (Gn 26^) ; to Jacob He is ' the 
God of A. and the fear of Isaac' (Gn 31'*-). A. 
never speaks of J" as the God of his fathers. A. is 
the founder of the religion ; he is the head of the 
family which had J" for its God. There is no 
designation of the God of Israel which can go 
farther back to the origin of the Heb. faith 
than the often-repeated title * the God of A.' (cf. 
Ps 470). 

The story of A. reflects the belief in the free 
grace of God which chose the patriarch and brought 
him from a distant land, and in spite of his failures 
loved him and made His covenant with him. 
The call of A. and the promises made him thus 
represent the Election (4K\oy^) of Israel. A. as the 
chosen servant is the prophet, the instrument of 
J"'8 purpose (Gn 20'). He is the friend of God (Is 
41», 2 Ch 20'. Cf. Arab. ElKhalil). God's mercies 
towards him are appealed to by the prophets of the 
Captivity (Is 51», Ezk 33'^) as the ground of con- 
fidence tnat J" would not forsake the heirs of the 
promises made to A. 

The unique relation in which A., in Isr. theology, 
stood to the God of revelation is indicated by the 
ref. of the prophets to A. as ' the one ' (see I.s 51'- ^ 
Ezk 33« Nial 2'*). In the Hk of Sir, A. is spoken 
of as 'great father of a multitude of nations ; and 
there was none found like him in glory ; who kept 
the law of the Most High, and was taken into 
covenant Avith Him : in his flesh he established the 
covenant ; and when he was proved he was found 

faithful ' (44^'* ^). In these words are summarised 
the chief points upon which the later Jewish 
literature esp. insisted in any reference to the life 
and character of A. He was the founder of the 
race ; he was credited with a perfect knowledge of 
the Torah ; he was the institutor of circumcision ; 
he was tried, and in virtue of his faith was declared 

IV. A. IN THE Theolooy OF NT.— In NT, A. is 
referred to in a variety of ways. The words of 
John the Baptist in Mt 3*, Lk 3*, and of St. Paul, Ho 
9', rebuke the popular Jewish supposition that 
descent from A. carried with it any special claim 
upon divine favour. Our Lord speaks of A. as one 
with whom all the partakers of divine redemption 
shall be privileged to dwell (Mt 8") ; and as of one 
who is both cognisant of things on earth, and is 
also entrusted with the special charge over the 
souls of the blest (Lk 16^). Our Lord employs the 
imagery of current religious belief ; A. is the typical 
representative of 'the righteous' who have been 
redeemed ; he is ' the father of the faithful.' Hence 
He says (Jn %^), * Your father A. rejoiced to see 
My day; and he saw it, and was glad.' He obtained 
a vision of the meaning of the promises, and 
rejoiced in the hope of their future fulfilment. 
Christ was the consummation of all the aspirations 
of A., the father of the race. According to the 
Jewish tradition (Bereshith Eabba 44,Wun8che), A. 
saw the whole history of his descendants in the 
mysterious vision recorded in Gn 15^"^-. Thus he 
is said to. have ' rejoiced with the joy of the law ' 
(Westcott on Jn 8««). 

The subject of the faith of A. seems to have 
formed a stock subject of discussion in the Jewish 
synagogue. It is alluded to in 1 Mac 2*^ ' Was not A. 
found faithful in temptation, and it was reckoned 
unto him for righteousness ? ' The ' locus classicus ' 
for the subject was Gn 15* ; and the question 
propounded by the Jewish teachers turned upon 
the nature of the faith which was counted to 
A. for righteousness. To Philo the whole history 
of A. was merely an allegory descriptive of the 
truly M'ise man whose inner nature is made one 
with the divine by teaching {dtBaffKaXla), as 
Isaac's by nature (4>v<tis), and Jacob's by discipline 
{&ffK7jaii). In Philo's treatment of the subject, 
'faith,' which frees the soul from the dominion of 
the senses, was 'the queen of virtues' (de Abrah. 
ii. p. 39) ; and Philo refers to Gn 15® at least 10 times 
(see Lightfoot, Gal. p. 158, and Ryle, Philo and 
Holy Scripture, p. 55) for the purpose of indicating 
the supreme excellence of A.'s faith. 

Rabbinical Judaism did not adopt the symbolical 
and abstract explanation which satislied the Alex, 
philosopher. It regarded A. as inseparable from 
A.'s seed, and the faith of A. as consisting in the 
fulfilment of the law. 

Against this Rabbinic interpretation St. Paul 
directs his argument in Ro 4*° and Gal 3. Faith 
with the apostle is the motive power of the whole 
spiritual life, and he lays stress on the fact that the 
mention of A.'s faith precedes the institution 
of circumcision. The faith of the patriarch was 
not due to the rite ; it was only ratified and con- 
firmed by it (cf. Ro 4'-^* and the notes of Sanday 
and Headlam). The same subject comes under 
discussion in the Ep. of St. James ; and there the 
apostle of the circumcision safeguards, as it were, 
the Christian position from a perversion of the 
Pauline teaching. With St. James ' the faith ' of 
A. is not so much the motive power of spiritual 
life as the settled belief, the genuineness of which 
can only be tested by action (Ja 2'", .see Alayor, in 

Yet another reference to A.'s faith is found in 
He 11*"", where the patriarch is described as having 
been 'enabled to work towards the fulfilment of 




God's counsel by his trust in the unseen ' ( Westeott, 
in loe). The three features of the patriarch's life 
which the "WTiter of the Ep. selects for the illus- 
tration of this ' faith,' are (1) self -surrender, in the 
departure from his home (v.*) ; (2) patience, in the 
pilgrims expectation of a future abiding place 
{y\r- ^^) ; (3) intluence, since his faith, affecting 
Sarah's faith, led to the fulfilment of the promise 

Later Jewish teaching, dwelling on the same 
theme, says, ' In like manner thou lindest that A. 
our father inherited this world and the world to 
come solely by the merit of faith whereby he 
believed on the Lord " (Mechilta on Ex 14"). 

V. Jewish Tradition'. — It was natural that 
Jewish tradition should be busy with regard to the 
great founder of the people of Israel. From the 
fact that A. received the divine call in Ur of 
the Chaldees, and ur in Heb. meant 'flame,' the 
strange story was invented of his having been cast 
into a fiery furnace by Nimrod. This legend 
appears in various forms. One of the best known 
is that which is recorded in the Targ. of Jonathan 
on Gn 11"^ 'And it was when Nimrod had cast A. 
into the furnace of fire because he would not 
worship his idol, and the fire had no power to bum 
him, that Haraus heart became doubtful, saying, 
If Nimrod overcome, I will be on his side ; but if 
A. overcome, I will be on his side. And when all 
the people who were there saw that the fire had no 

S»wer over A., they said in their hearts, Is not 
aran the brother of A. fuU of divinations and 
charms, and has he not uttered spells over the fire 
that it should not bum his brother ? Immediately 
there fell tire from the high heavens and consumed 
him ; and Haran died in sight of Terah his father, 
where he was burned in the land of his nativity, in 
the furnace of fire which the Chaldaeans had made 
for A. his brother ' (Etheridge's tr.). 

Another version of the story appears in B&reshUh 
Babba, where A. refuses to obey Nimrod's command 
that he should worship fire ; and suggests that it 
would be more reasonable to worship water that 
quenches fire, or the clouds that give the rain, or 
the wind that drives the clouds ; finally, he exhorts 
Nimrod to worship the one God. Ximrod causes A. 
to be thrown into a fiery furnace ; but God delivers 
him from its flames. JFor other instances of the 
Rabbinic treatment of A.'s life, see "Weber, System 
der Altsfjnagog. PaUistin. Tkeologie, Leipzig, 1880. 
In Pirkc Abhoth (v. 4) it is said, ' With ten tempta- 
tions was A. our father tempted, and he ysTithstood 
thera all ; to show how great was the love of A. 
our father.' For the ways in which the Rabbins 
reckoned up these ten temptations, see Taylor, 
Sai/ings of the, Jexcish Fathers, p. 94. 

the facts that A. came from Haran, that he won 
his victory at Hobah, near Damascus (Gn \A^), 
and that his servant was a native of Damascus (Gn 
15^), seem to have given rise to the legend that A. 
conquered Damascus. So Josephus relates that 
' Nicolaus of Damascus,' in the 4th book of his 
histoiT, says thus : ' A. reigned at Damascus, being 
a foreigner, who came with an army out of the land 
of Babylon. . . . Now the name of A. is even still 
famous in the country of Damascus ; and they show 
a village named after him. The habitation of A.' 
(Ant. I. vii. 2). A.'s native country having been 
Chaldfea, he was creditetl by the Jews \dt\x a know- 
ledge of secret arts and magic (cf . Philo, de pr(em. 
et pan. : Jos. Ant. I. %-ii.); and Josephus records 
the tradition that A. first introduced into Egypt the 
knowledge of arithmetic and astrology which he had 
brought with him from Chaldaea [Ant. I. viiL). 

For the preservation of these and other legends, see Cod. 
pgrudepiar. Vft. Tfgt., J. A. Fabric, torn. 1 (1722), and Beer, 
Leben Ab. (1S5!>). The Tettament of A. (first ed. by James, 'Texts 
and Studies, Camb. 1S92) desenes especial mention as an apocr. 

VOL. I. 2 

(apparently of Egyp. origin) of ^McaljrpUc character, fint men- 
tioned by Origen, Legimu* . . . futtUum et iniquitatit angelo$ 
tiiper Abrahami taivte et interUu diaetptantet, etc. (/n Le. 
Horn. 3.5X and recently brought before the notice of stadents tai 
a DMWt interesting form by the learned editor. 

vi. The Name •Abraham.'— The attempt* to 
discover the etjTuology of this name can hardly as 
yet be said to have been succes.-iful. According to 
one very prob. explanation, Abram represents a 
contracted form of Abiram or Aburam, just as 
' Abner ' probably stands for ' Abiner ' or ' Abuner ' ; 
while Abraham may have been a local, or an 
Aramaic, dialectical variety of pronunciation. 
Abiram was a fairly common name (cf. Nu 16'- ^ 
26*, 1 K 16**) in Ueb. ; and it is said to be a recognised 
proper name in the Assyr. Inscriptions, under the 
form of Abu-ramu (so Schrader and Sayce). The 
analogy of other proper names, like Abi-melek, 
Abiel, Abi-jah, makes it exceedingly doubtful 
whether the name Abram can rightly bear the 
meanings traditionally a.ssigned to it, 'Lofty 
father,' or 'the father of the lofty one.' For (1) 
it stands to reason that no child, however lofty its 
descent, would have been called ' father,' or ' the 
father of a god, whether Melech, or Jah, or Ram ; 
(2) the feminine names Abi-gail, Abi-tal, show the 
impossibility of this explanation. Probably, there- 
fore, the right meaning of the name is ' Ram (the 
lofty one) is father,' as Hiram would mean ' Ram 
is brother,' of the owner of the name. Even so, 
the origin of the longer name Abraham remains 
still unexplained. The derivation of the name in 
Gn IT** is only a popular word-play, connecting the 
termination -raham with the Heb'. j-ci ' multitude.' 
Halevy {Rev. Et. Jiiiv. 1887, p. 177) ventured to 
propose that Abraham represents err -\'zk 'the 
chief of a multitude,' the first part of the name 
being derived, not from ab, ' father,' but from aMr, 
' chief,' and the second part from ham (root hamah), 
' multitude.' For this theory there does not appear 
to be much prol»bility. The deriv. of the longer 
name must be left uncertain, although the most 
likely explanation of it is to be found in the variant 
pron. of proper names in dilierent localities or in 
different clans of the same people. Thus cti may 
be a dialectical form of nn ; and Abraham the same 
in meaning as Abram, just as Abiram is the same 
in meaning as Abram (cf. Oxf. Heb. Lex. p. 4, and 
Baethgen, Beitrage zur Sem. Bel. Gesch.). 

LiTBRATTRK.— Besides the works mentioned above, the reader 
is referred to the Comm. on (ienesis bv Delitzsch, and DiUmann ; 
to the Histories of Israel by E»-ald, Reuss, and Kittel ; to the 
works on OT Theology by Oehler, Schultz, and Mllmann. For 
illustration from Assvr. sources, see Sayce,i*afriareA<i/ Pal. (1893); 
Tomkins, Times of AbraJiam aSTS) ; Schrader. COT^ aS35). 

H. E. Ryle. 

ABRAHAM, BOOK OF.— A work, consisting of 300 

oTtxot, bearing this name, is found in a list of 

Jewish apocryphal wTitings, preserved from a much 

earlier period, m an appendix to the Chronographia 

Compendiaria of Nicephorus (c. 800 A.D.). This 

list is printed in Credner's Gesch. des Kanons, 1847, 

, as well as in Schiirer's HJP II. iii. 126. The so- 

i called Synopsis Athanasii presents the same list, 

! omitting, however, the number of <rrixoi, which 

is attached to each book in the Stichometiy of 

Nicephorus. It is likely that this is the book from 

which Origen quotes as to a contest between the 

angels of righteousness and iniquity with regard 

to "the salvation of Abraham (In Luc. Horn. 35); 

and James is prob. correct in identifying this Book 

with the Testament of A. (Texts and Studies, ii. 2, 

p. 27ff.). An Apoc. of A. is mentioned by Epi- 

phanius as used by the Ophites. 

J. T. Marshall. 

ABRAHAM'S BOSOM.— A term used of the abode 

of the righteous dead, defining it as a position of 

' blessedness in intimate association with the father 

of the faithful, 'the friend of God.' In Scripture 




it occurs only in the parable of the Rich Man and 
Lazarus (Lk 16'''*' '■"), where it appears both in the 
singular (KdXroi 'A3padfi) and in the plural (k^Xttm 
'A^padu). Taken irom the practice oi reclining at 
table, so that the head of the guest leant back upon 
the bosom of his neighbour, the place of distinction 
belonging to him who was seated in this way next 
the host, the figure expresses the ideas of nearest 
fellowship and highest honour. In the llabbin. 
literature the phrase (u'3k om^K he ip'n) was applied 
to the place reserved for the pious departed, into 
which tliey passed immediately after death, and in 
which thev dwelt free from the woes of hell (cf. 
4 Mac 13"). It was a Jewish belief that the 
intermediate state contained two distinct compart- 
ments — a place of relative preparatory reward for 
the good, and a place oi relative preimratory 
penalty for the evil (cf. Bk of Enocn 22, 2 Es 
). Some of the Jewish books speak of 
receptacles (promptuaria) into which the 
souis OI the faithful dead were taken (Apoc. of Bar 
3(P, 2 Es 4«'- « 1" etc. ). And in the theology of the 
3rd cent, and onwards it was taught that the 
circumcised should not be subject to hell. It was 
a saying of Kabbi Levi (of the 3rd cent. ), that in 
the world to come Abraham would sit at the 
entrance to hell, and sutTer no circumcised Isr. to 
pass into it. It has been usually supposed, there- 
fore, that in NT the phrase ' Abraham's bosom' 
refers to the intermea. state, and designates a 
division of the undenvorld, where the good enjoy 
a preliminary measure of blessedness. In this case 
it IS identified with Paradise, the lower Paradise as 
dist. from the heavenly, or is taken to describe a 
condition of peculiar honour in the Hades-Paradise. 
It is uncertain, however, when this idea of two 
separate localities within the undersvorld came to 

Srevail. It was the idea of the later and mediasval 
udaism. But whether it was in circulation so 
early as our Lord's time is doubtful. There seems 
reason to believe that the older Judaism spoke only 
of a Garden of Eden for the righteous dead, and a 
Gehinnom (Gehenna, Hell) for the wicked dead, 
identifying the latter w ith Sheol. If so, ' Abraham's 
bosom in the parable w ould not be the name for 
a special compartment of Hades, or for an intermed. 
condition of blessedness distinct from and pre- 
liminary to the final state of perfect felicity. And 
in the iwirable itself it is only the rich man that is 
expressly described as ' in Hades.' 

LmERATmE.— Wetetein on Lk IC^Z-ffl; Liphtfoot, Ew. Eeb. 
p. 831, etc. ; Fritzsche u. Grimm, Exen. Ilandb. zu den Apocry- 
phen, on 4 Mac 13i« ; Schurer, JIJp II. ii. 180 ; Hamburger, 
RE ; Weber, Syttem der alUyn. palast. Theol. p. 328 ; Meyer- 
Weiss, Kom.» p. 643, eta ; Salmond, Christ. Doct. of Immor- 
tality, p. 345. 

S. D. F. Salmond. 
ABRECH (tii:n).— A word called out before Joseph 
as he passed through the land of Egypt in his 
official capacity of prime minister to the Pharaoh 
(Gn 41*^). Its exact .signification is not a matter 
of agreement amongst scholars. The LXX (iK^pv^ev 
IfurpoaOev o^oO (cijpi'f) and the Vulg. (damante 
prcecone, ut omnes coram eo genu flecterent) are not 
literal or direct translations. Tlie Targ. of Onk. 
interprets it as ' father of the king,' on the ground 

Sossihly of Gn 45*. Jewish scholars who have 
erived it from Heb. refer it to the root T3? hcnd 
the knee, in the Hiph. Imv., where, for the usual n, 
an K has been substituted (cf. Jer 25'). Luther 
regarded the case as hopeless, in saying, 'Was 
ahrech heisse, lassen wir die Ziinckcr suchen bisz 
an den jiingsten Tag' (Ges. Thes. p. 19). Of the 
many proposed Egjp. (and Coptic) derivations, we 
need note only the following :—(!) Abrek (airptK) 
caput inclinare (Rossi, Etumol. a-gypt. p. 1, in Ges. 
That. p. 19) ; (2) ap-rex-v, head of the raise (Harkavy, 
Berl. JEgypt. Zeitschr. 1869, "p. 132) ; (3) ab-rek, 
rejoice thou (Cook, Speaker's Com. in loco, p. 482) ; 

(4) db(u)-rek, thy commundment is the object of our 
desire, i.e. 'we are at thy service' (Renouf, Pro- 
ceedings Sac. Bib. Arch. Nov. 1888, pp. 5-10). On 
the other hand, several derivations are suggested 
from the Asiatic-Sem. side : (1) Sayce compares it 
with an ' Accadian ' abrik, a seer, appearing also 
in the Sem. form, on an unpublished tablet, of 
abrikku {Hibbert Lectures, 1887, p. 183, n. 3) ; (2) 
Delitzsch compares the Assyr. abarakku (fem. 
ab(a)rakkatu), a titled personage, possibly grand 
vizier {Paradies, p. 225 ; Heb. Lang. p. 26 ; Proleg. 
p. 145; and Assyr. Worterbuch, p. 68 f.); (3) 
Schrader dissents from Delitzsch (COT^ i. ,139); 
(4) Halevy derives it from paraku (Rev. d. Etudes 
Juivcs, 1885, p. 304). But of all the suggested 
sources of this much-abused word, the Heb. and 
the Assyr. above mentioned seem to carry with 
them the least number of difficulties. (The text 
of Gn 41*"- does not indicate that there was any- 
thing more than a salute. ) It is, in either event, an 
Egyptianised Sem. word, probably carried down 
into Ejjypt during the centuries of Hvksos rule. 
This opinion receives support, too, from tlie evidence 
of the Tel el-Amama taWets that there had been 
for many centuries before Joseph's day free inter- 
national communication between Egypt and Asia. 

Ira M. Price. 
ABROAD. — In its modem meaning of 'in (or 
' to ') another country,' a. is not used in AV 
or IIV. The nearest approach is Jn 1 1'^ ' The 
children of God that are scattered a.' On the 
other hand a. is used in senses now wholly or 
nearly obsolete. 1. It signifies specially outside 
one's own dwelling, the opp. of 'at home.' Lv 
18^ 'Whether she be bom at home or bom a.'; 
La 1-" 'A. the sword bereaveth, at home there 
is as death ' ; Jg 12*-' ' Thirty daughters he sent 
a. , and thirty daughters he brought in from a. for 
his sons ' ; Dt 23" ' Then shall he go a. out of the 
camp ' ; Lk 8^'' ' Neither anything hid that shall 
not be known and come a.' (RV ' to light') ; Sir 26' 
' A drunken woman and a gadder a.' Cf. — 

' Where as he lay 
So sick alway 

He might not come abroad.' 

—Sir T. More, A Merry Jest. 

2. On the outside of anything: Lv 13'^ 'If a 
leprosy break out a. in the skin.' 3. In the 
general sense of openly, freely, widely : Mk 1** 
' But he went out, and began to publish it much, 
and t« blaze a. the matter ' ; Ro 16^* ' For your 
obedience is come a. unto all men ' ; S" ' The love of 
God is shed a. in your hearts.' J. Hastings. 

ABRONAH (i;i:3S). — A station in the journeyinga, 
occurs only Nu 33^^- *>, AV Ebronah. 

ABSALOM (D"iV^3{<, in 1 K 15- i<>niV':;s Abishalom, 
' father is peace '), the third son of David (2 S 3", 
1 Ch 3-). He first comes into prominence in con- 
nexion with the story of his sister Tamar (2 S 13). 
After the foul outrage done to the latter by Amnon, 
David's eldest son, A. determined upon revenge, 
but concealed his purpose for two years. At the 
end of this period he gave a feast at the time of 
sheep-shearing, and invited the king and his sons. 
David declined for himself, but permitted Amnon 
and his brothers to go. While the feast was at its 
height, tlie servants of A., upon a signal given by 
their master, fell upon Amnon and slew him. 
Having thus avenged the affront put upon his sister, 
A. fled to the court of his maternal grandfather, 
Talmai, the king of Geshur, where he remained for 
three years. Then Joab, perceiving that David 
longed for a reconciliation with his son, contrived, 
through the mediumof 'a wise woman of Tekoah.'to 
procure a reversal of the virtual sentence of banish- 
ment, and A. returned to Jems., but was not pel*- 




mitted to approach the presence of the king. This 
unnatural condition of things continued for two 
years, when A. applied to Joab to use his interest 
at court to procure a full reconciliation. David's 
general had, however, for some reason become less 
hearty in the matter, and declined even to meet 
A., until the latter resorted to the expedient of 
ordering his servants to set fire to JoaVs barley 
field. When the o\raer of the field came in person 
to demand an explanation of this injury, he was at 
length persuaded to intercede with the king on 
behalf of his son, and his mediation proved success- 
ful. It is easy to conceive that David, by his 
injudicious mingling of leniency and severity, had 
conjpletely forfeited the confidence of his son, and 
it was doubtless from this occasion onwards that 
A. began to hatch the plot that proved fatal 
to him, and which has gained for his name an 
unenviable immortality. He took advantage of a 
misunderstanding that seems to have existed be- 
tween Daxad and the men of Judah, and set him- 
self sedulously to gain the confidence and affection 
of all visitors to the court. In particular, those 
who came to have matters of law decided were 
flattered by the attentions of the heir-apparent, 
who also was careful to drop hints that the king 
might do far more to expedite the administration 
of justice, and that if he (Absalom) were only judge, 
a very different state of things would be inaugur- 
ated. Thus he 'stole the hearts of the men of 
Israel.' He was greatly helped in the accomplish- 
ment of his scheme by the extraordinary personal 
charms he possessed (2 S 14^*'*'). 

How long this preparatory st^e lasted is un- 
certain. The forty years of 2 S 15^ manifestly 
cannot be correct, and should perhaps be read /our 
years. When at length he judged that the time 
was ripe for the execution of his rebellious enter- 
prise, A. obtained leave of absence from his 
tather, on pretence of having to go to Hebron to 
pay a v^ow he had made during his sojourn in 
Geshur. His emissaries were at work throughout 
the whole land, preparing for a general rising, and 
his adherents became daily more numerous. At 
the very outset he gained over David's famous 
counsellor Ahithophel the Gilonite, who may have 
had reasons of his own for deserting the king 
(see Bathsheba). So alarming were the reports 
which reached David, that he resolved to abaiidon 
the capital and save himself and his household by 
flight to the eastern Jordanic territory. He was 
accompanied by the faithful Cherethites and Pele- 
thites, to whom were added on tliis occasion a body 
of Gittites who had probably formed part of David's 
followers in the old days at Ziklag. The offer of 
Zadok and Abiathar to accompany him with the 
ark was declined, and Hushai the Archite was also 
directed to remain at Jerusalem and do his utmost 
to defeat the counsel of Ahithophel. Upon 
Absalom's arrival in Jerusalem, Hushai played the 
part of rebel so skilfully that he gained the com- 
plete confidence of the aspirant to the throne. 
Ahithophel first of aU counselled A. to take a step 
which would make the breach between him and his 
father irreparable (2 S 16"^'"^), and then advised 
that prompt measures should be taken to pursue 
and destroy Da\id before he could rally around 
him anv considerable number of troops. Hushai 
counselled delay and cautious measures, and his 
advice was followed, to the chagrin of Ahithophel, 
who, seeing that all was lost, went and set his 
house in order and hanged himself. The two sons 
of Zadok and Abiathar w ere despatched by Hushai 
with intelligence to Da\id of what had transpired 
at Jerusalem. The young men were hotly pursued, 
and narrowly escaped capture, but evading their 
pursuers by stratagem reached David, who the 
same night with his whole company passed over 

Jordan. At Mahanaim, Barzillai the Gileadite and 
others supplied him liberally with provisions. Ere 
long a sufficient number of troops was assembled 
to justify the king in joining battle with the 
forces of A., which by this time had also passed 
the Jordan. The decisive battle was fought in 
'the wood of Ephraim.' David, yielding to the 
wish of his supporters that he should not expose 
his life by takin^; the field in person, arranged his 
army in three divisions, commanded respectively 
by Joab, Abishai, and Ittai the Gittite. To each 
of these three generals he gave the charge, ' Deal 
gently, for my sake, with the young man, even 
with Absalom.' From the very first the tide of 
battle set strongly against the rebel army, which 
lost heavily in the engagement, and still more 
heavily in its retreat through the forest. Absalom 
himself was hurried by his mule under an oak, and 
becoming entangled by the head in the fork of a 
branch, hung delenceless. In this situation he was 
discovered by a soldier, who at once informed Joab. 
The royal general, who appreciated the situation 
more justly than his master, unhesitatingly pierced 
the hapless youth to the heart. Having thus dis- 
posed of the rebel leader, Joab recalled his troops 
from the pursuit of the vanquished army. When 
news of the issue of the battle was brought to 
Da\id, he forgot everything else in grief at his 
son's death, and exclaimed again and again, ' O 
my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom ! would 
God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my 
son ! ' This conduct, natural enough from one 
point of view, might have had serious results but 
for the stuidy common-sense of Joab, who pointed 
out that the king had to think of his soldiers as 
well as his son. The remonstrance was sufficiently 
rough in its expression, yet David recognised its 
wisdom, and, stifling his emotion for the time, 
came out and thanked his troops for their gallant 
ser\*ice in the field. A. was buried near the scene 
of his death, and the spot was marked by a great 
heap of stones. According to 2 S 14^ he had three 
sons, and a daughter named Tamar. The latter is 
with much probability identified with Maacah of 

1 K 15% the wife of Rehoboam (cf. 2 S 3^ 2 Ch 11=»^). 
The sons must have predeceased their father, or else 
a different tradition is followed in 2 S 18", where 
we are told that A. had no son. 

The story of Absalom forms part of the section 

2 S &-20 and 1"K 1-2, which, with the exception 
of a few passages, comes from a single pen. Its 
dominating aim is to txace the progress of Solomon 
to the throne. Hence it has to explain how the 
three sons of David who seemed to have superior 
claims, Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah, failed to 
secure the succession. The style is bright and 
flowing, the descriptions are graphic, and, with 
all the writer's evident partiality for David and 
Solomon, the historical character of these chapters, 
down even to the minutest details, is estabUslied by 
proofs that are amongst the strongest in the O.T. 

LrrEBATCBE.— Driver, Introduction, p. 172f. ; BuUde, fiidUer 
tt. Samiitl, pp. -247-256 ; Wellhausen, ComposiHim des HeaatatA*, 
etc, pp. 25S-263, also Hist, qfltr. and JtuL 50 1. 


&BSALOM rS' ApOCR. ('A.S€<r<rd.\w/xoi, 'A-^dXw/MW 
A). — 1. A. was the father of Mattathias, one of the 
captains who stood by Jonathan the Maccabee 
when the main part of his army fled at the be- 
ginning of a battle against the Syrians at Hazor in 
Northern Galilee (1 Mac ll'»= Jos. Ant. xra. v. 7). 
It is perhaps the same Absalom whose son Jonathan 
was sent by Simon the Maccabee to secure Joppa 
after his brother Jonathan had been imprisoned 
by Tryphon (1 Mac 13^= Jos. Ant. xm. vi. 4). 
2. According to 2 Mac IP", one of two envoys 
sent by the Jews to Lysias when he began to treat 
with them for peace after his defeat at Bethsuron 




(Beth-zur) in 105 B.C. In 1 Mac 4»*'=Jos. Ant. 
xn. vii. 5, no mention is made of overtures for i>eace, 
but Lysiaa is stated to have withdrawn to Antioch 
for reinforcements. It is probable tliat the author 
of 2 Mae has made some confusion between the 
first e.\pedition of Lysias and a second invasion 
two or tliree years later, when, after gainin;^ a 
victory at l>(!th-zur, he made terms with the Jews 
in conscuuence of troubles in Syria. 

H. A. Whitk. 
ABSALOM'S TOMB.— See Jerusalem. 

ABUBUS ('A^ov^ot, 1 Mao 16"-") was the 
father of Ptolemy, the son-in-law of Simon the 
Maccabee, by whom Simon was murdered at 

ABUNDANCE.— This word is usr.l wiih great 
freedom in AV, translating about twenty Heb. and 
nearly as many Gr. words. Each occurrence should 
be considered m relation to the orig. word. Here it 
is necessjiry only to draw attention to the obs. use 
of a. to signify superflidti/ : Mk 12*^ ' All they did 
cast in of their a.' (KV 'superfluity,' Gr. rd wepiir- 
atOov, as opp. to Ixrr^fnjffii, ' deficiency,' said of the 
widow ; so Lk 21*) ; Ps 105** ' Their land brought 
forth frogs in a.' (RV 'swarmed with frogs,' Heb. 
]nv; so Ex S\ and cf. Gn l-^-'^^ 9^) ; 2 Co 12' 
' tlirough the a. of the revelations ' (Gr. iiirep^oXri, 
RV ' e.xceeding greatness '). 

J. Hastings. 

ABUSE, ABUSER. — 1. In NT abuse is used 
twice {as tr. of Karaxpaofiai) when the meaning is 
not a. but ' use to the full ' regardless of con- 
sequences (see Thayer, N. T. Lex. ) : 1 Co 7^^ 
'Tliose that use the world as not abusing it' (RV 
m. 'u.sing it to the full'): 9"* 'that I a. not my 
power in the jjospel ' (RV ' so as not to use to 
the full my right m the gospel '). 2. In OT a. is 
found thrice (as tr. of S^j;) with a person as ol)jcct. 
In I S 31* and I Ch 10* the meaning is insult or 
dishonour, as in Milton, Sam. Ag. i. 30 — 

' I, dark in lij^ht, exposal 
To (l.iily fraud, contempt, abuse, and wronjy.' 

But in J"; 19^ it is the old sense of defile or 
ravish : ' 1 hey knew her, and abused her all the 
night.' Cf. Fordyce, Serm. to Younrf Women 
(17(37): ' He that abuses you, dishonours his mother.' 
Hence in 1 Co 6" dpafvoKoirrji, 'one that lies with 
a male,' is tr'' ' abusers of themselves with man- 
kind ' (RV 'men'); and RV gives the same tr. 
at 1 Ti 1". 

J. Hastings. 
ABYSS.— The translation (in RV, not in AV) 
of ifivcraoi, a word compounded from a intensive 
and ^v(Ta-6s, Ionic form of fivdds, depth (2 Co IP'), 
and connected (see Curtius) with /Sotfri, deep, and 
the Eng. bath ; primarily and classically an ^j. = 
very deep, or even huttomless ; api»ried to the 
yawning gulfs of Tartarus (Eur. Phftm.. KK).")) 
and, metiiph., to a sea of calamity (/Esdi. Si/p/il. 
470): in profane Greek used as a subst. liv Diog. 
Laert. only (iv. 5. '27), on an epitaph, -th: l.l,u1< 
abyss of Pluto.' (Comp. Job41*» LXX toi' rdprapov 
TT)% i^vffffov.) Once (|>erhaps twice) in LXX it is 
an adj. (Wis 10" tlie bottomless deep of the Red 
Sea: possibly also Job 3()"» metaph. = boundless) : 
elsewhere, LXX, NT, and occl. Gr., a subst. ; in 
LXX the trans., with few exceptions, of Uhom, 
the tnmnltnous nvifer-deep (some thirty times), 
and, once each, of nu'ziUnh, sefi-fltxp (Job 41'), 
of z^lnh (Is 44"), the deep flood (of Euphrates) 
and of rahfibh, annrious place (Job Sf}'* if subst.). 
Primnrihj in LXX it signifies (witii teh&m) the 
waters beneath, by which tlie earth was at first 
covered (Gn 1», Ps 104«-»), but on which it was 
afterwards made to rest (Jon 2* ; sec Ps 24»), and 

from which its springs and rivers welled up (Gn 
7" 49^, m 8' : cf. Rev 9' <f>p^ap). Not unnatur- 
ally it denoted also the upper seas and rivers 
connected with the subterraneous waters (Ps 107* 
100"), the original notion of titmidtuousncss in 
tihOm (Ps 42') l)eing overlaid by that of depth in 
d^vffcTos (Sir 24*', Jon 2«, Ps 30'). Secondarily, from 
the notion of subterraneousness and depth, it is 
the place after death, but is never in LXX the 
actual translation of Sheol (though this etymologi- 
cal ly=</ci*<A, Ps IV^ ; cf. Ps 80"); in this sense, 
apparently, it is not justifiable to eliminate alto- 
gether the connotation of raging waters. [Comp. 
the contrast with heaven in Gn 7" (irypfal iBvatrov) 
with that in Ps 139» (Sheol) and in Ro 10' 
((l/3i/(7(ros) ; also Job 41«» LXX, and Job 2G»-« 
(i/Saros).] The relation to Sliiol, with its dull, 
shadowy monotony and cncn miscTy, coupled 
with the OT idea of Sheol as a ]tit dungeon (Is 
24^''), and with pre-NT apocalyptic usage (Enoch 
10" c/uism of fire; 21'" 7>mon of tlie angels; 18" 
abyss), prepared for the NT use of the word. It 
occurs only twice outside Rev : in Ro 10' it is 
simply the abode of the dead ; in Lk 8^' it is the 
prison destined for evil spirits. In seven passages of 
Rev (chs. 9. 11. 17. 20) it is a prison in which 
evil powers are confined (20'-'*), and out of which 
tliey can at times be let loose (11' 17**), but is not 
the lake of fire ('20'^- '") ; nor is Satan regarded as 
himself cast into this prison, but only to be so 
cast (201- 2) for 1000 years. J. Massik. 

ACACIA.— See Shittim. 

ACCABA (B 'A/cKtt^d, A Ta^a, AV Agaba), 1 Es 
5^. — His descendants returned among t he ' temple 
servants ' under Zerubbabel. Called Hagab (3Jn), 
Ezr 2« ; Hagaba, Neh 7*«. 

ACCAD, ACCADIANS.— Accad (or Akkad), with 
Babel, Erech, and Calneh, was one of the chief 
cities in the land of Shinar. These four con- 
stituted the beginning of the kingdom of Nimrod 
(GnlO'"). The LXX reads 'Apxfi^. The Bab.-Assyr. 
inscriptions are the source of all our information on 
tliis name. It was at first supposed that Akkadu, 
occurring so frequently in the inscriptions in 
connexion with Snnier, referred only to a district 
or province. But it is now known that there was 
a city of that name (Hilprecht, Freibrief Neb. L 

col. ii. L 50). Its form is "^ »^yS:^i» 

and is read al Akkad (or 'non-Sem.' Agade), city of 
Accad, the name under which the city was for long 
centuries known. It was the residence of the first 
historical ruler of all Babylonia, Sargon I., whose 
activity dates from 3800 B.C., according to the 
statement of Nalwnidus (555-538 B.C.), an inscrip- 
tion discovered in 1881 on the site of Sippar. 
Frequent references to two Sippars, ' Sippar of the 
Sun-god ' and ' Sippar of Anunit,' indicate some 
strange fortunes in connexion with this site. The 
worship of Ishtar of Accad was replaced by that of 
Anunit of Sippar. In very early times Sippar 
was the chief seat of sun-worship, and Accmi of 
Ishtar worship. Gradually there was a political 
absorption, and all references seem to justify the 
assumption that of those two cities lying close 
together, Sippar with its Sun-god became the 
more i)owerlul, and practically absorbed Accad. 
The worsliip of Ishtar, however, did not lose its 
identity, but was continued under the name of 
Sippar of Anunit (McCurdy, Hist. Prophecy and 
thf. Monnnwnts, § 94). It is possible, but still 
unproved, that the city of Accad lay opposite to 
Sippar on the left bank of the Euphrates. Its 
exact site is a matter of doubt, but it is thought to 
have been located near Ahn-habba, about fifteen 




miles west of Baghdad. Delitzsch conjectures that 
it uiay have beeu one of the two cities which bore the 
name' of Sepharvaim, but McCurdy locates this 
double city in X. Syria (§ 349). The Wolfe expedi- 
tion to Babylonia in 1884-85 (of. Report, pp. 24, 25) 
located it at Anbar, on the Euphrates, N. W. of the 
ruins of Babylon. It was probably the capital city 
of miU Akhndl. (Consult for greater fulness the 
literature named below.) 

From ancient times the kings of Babylonia, and 
the kings of Assyria who ruled over this territory, 
appended to their names sar Sunveri u Akkadi, 
king of Sumer and Akkad. Now, what was the 
origin of this double title? It was probably not 
indicative of the two regions of Babylonia, S. and 
N., as kings who ruled only over S. Babylonia 
claimed it. It was also claimed by conquerors 
who had not advanced farther S. than Nippur (cf. 
Winckler, Untevsuch, z. altorient. Ges. 6511'.). It 
seems, then, that ' Sumer and Accad,' in the titles of 
kings, may have been no more than a claim to the 
ancient territoiy and city of Accad, with additional 
territory (cf. McCurdy, § 110). (For other views 
of the question, cf. Schrader, Keilinschriften n. 
Geschichtsf. p. 533 f. ; Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 198 ; 
Tiele, Gesch. Babyl.-Assi/riens, part i. p. 76 1.) 

Upon the identification of these names with 
specific localities has been built up the theory of 
the so-called Sumerians and Accadians. To the 
consideration of this theory we will now turn our 

It is maintained by a certain school of Oriental 
historians and linguists, that the lower Mesopo- 
tamian valley was at an early day ]X)pulated by 
the Accadians, who were originally related to the 
Siunerians. Thev spoke, it is said, an agglutina- 
tive language. Tin the midst of these peoples 
Sem. tribes settled down, and adopted the language 
and customs of their foresettlers. Step by step the 
Sem. language gained ascendency, and about 1200 
B.C. the native tongue died out, except as a sacred 
and literary vehicle, in which capacity it served 
until a late date. It is claimed that those early 
non-Sem. peoples reached a high degree of civilisa- 
tion, that they left many traces of their culture in 
their monuments of art and language, and that we 
can readily interpret them. This supposed pre- 
historic people and their language are termed 
among Eng. Assyriologists, 'Accadians," among 
French and German ' Sumerians,' derived from the 
supposedly most important localities where the 
most ancient inscriptions are found. 

On the other hand, there is a growing school 
which maintains that the Semites, whom we know 
as possessing the cuneiform characters, were the 
inventors of these last and the developers of Sem. 
culture, and that the so-called ' Sumerians ' and 
' Accadians ' are but figments of an over-zealous 
scientific spirit. A few only of the points can be 
noticed. We find in the inscriptions of Assyria 
and Babylonia word-lists which give a twofold, and 
sometimes a threefold, explanation of cuneiform 
ideograms. These ideograms are found in all 
stages of the Bab.-Assyr. language. In these lists 
one column of explanations gives us regular Sem. 
words, and another, words somewhat unfamiliar 
in sound, which are supposed to be of non-Sem. 
origin. But careful scrutiny shows that these 
strange words yield to Sem. roots, and that even 
the most unfamiliar are simply made up of possible 
word-forms of the same idiom, disguised according 
to regular ascertainable methods. Again, what 
can be said of so-called bilingual or unilingual 
texts ? In both cases we meet with an abundance 
of these disguised Sem. words, and of Sem. gram- 
matical constructions and modes of thought. The 
evidence of the slight remains of prehistoric art in 
Babylon is not decisive. Again, the Sem. Baby- 

lonians never in any way speak of or allude to any 
such i)eople as the supposed Sumerians or Accadian.s. 
Still, the same language was used in Babylon down 
to the latest period of its lustory, with no name, 
nor even a tradition, of that supposed great 
and inliuential nation whose heritage fell to the 
Semites. Other peoples who came into contact 
with the Babylonians, and who exercised consider- 
able influence on them, e.g. the Elamites, receive 
frequent mention, but there is not the slightest 
allusion to an Accadian race. It is not impossible 
that new discoveries may remedy this defect, but 
it is certainly amazing that what is assumed to 
have been the most influential factor in early Bab. 
civilisation is entirely immentioned. When we 
find that Sem. documents date from as early a 
period as the earliest so-called ' Accadian,' and 
that this hypothetical language was used along- 
side of the regular Sem. for nearly 3000 years, we 
are inclined to ask, 'What does this mean?' 
In an examination of the language, Ave find many 
Sem. words and values which at first sight do not 
admit of such an explanation. But it is a fact 
that the number which do admit of it is con- 
tinually increasing. Out of 395 phonetic values. 
Prof. Delitzsch names 106 which he regards as 
demonstrably Sem. (Assyrische Gramtnatik, § 25). 
Prof. McCurdy adds more than 40 others, running 
up the list to about 150 values. It is not impos- 
sible that further investigation may greatly in- 
crease the number. 

But do not the inscriptions from Telloh, which are 
plainly ideographic, furnish conclusive proof of the 
soundness of the Accadian theory ? So one might 
expect ; but we are already finding in them actual 
Sem. words, disguised under the forms which are 
found in later bilingual texts. Besides, it is found 
that tiie oldest kings of ' Ur of the Chaldees,' the 
founders of the first Bab. kingdom, knew how to 
write Sem. as well as ' Accadian ' inscriptions. 

[Note by Editor. — Professor Price has been 
permitted to state his view of this question unre- 
servedly. For he is himself an accomplished student 
of Assyriology, and he has the support of some 
eminent scholars (see especially McCurdy, History, 
Prophecy, and the Monuments, i. 87 fl". ). But the 
Editor thinks it necessary to say that the weight 
of authority is undoubtedly on the other side, lead- 
ing Assyriologists everyAvhere having come to the 
conclusion that the view which Professor Price com- 
bats is substantially true. The reader should, how- 
ever, consult the literature which Professor Price 
has given below, representing both sides of the ques- 
tion, and the articles Assyria and Babylonia.] 

LrrBHATTRE. — Schrader, Zur Frage ruteh d. Urtpr. d. aUbab. 
Kultur, 1883 ; Haupt, Akkaditehe und Swnerxsehe KeiUehrift- 

texte, 18811.; Die SwmeriichrAkkaduche Spraehe, Verh. 

bten Or. Cong. ii. pp. 24&-287; JWe Sumeriteken 

Familiengetetze, 1870 ; Hommel, ZeUteh./. KeUichriftforsehung, 
vol. L p. 214 1. ; Zimmem, Babi/lonitche Bus$p*aitnen, 18S5, 
p. 71 f. ; Hommel, Ges. Bab.-A». 1885, 240 ff. ; Tiele, Bab.-A*. 
Get. 1886 f., 68; Hal^vy, Aperfu grammatieal de FAUograpkU 

as.'bab. 18S3 ; it&anges de critique et d'hiOoire relatif* 

aux peuple* timitiqties, IsS ; Delitzsch, A$. Granunatii, 1889, 
5 25 ; ilcCixrdv, Pretb. and R^. Reviete, Jan. 1891, pp. 58-81 ; 
Hist. Proph. and Mom. 1894, L §S 79-85; Hommel, 

Sumerisehe Lesestudce, 1891 ; several articles in Zeitsehrift fur 
Assyriologie, by Hal6v-T, Guyard, and others. 

Ira M. Prick. 

Besides other meanings, accept is used in the sense 
of ' receive with favour ' : Gn 4^ ' If thou doest 
well, shalt thou not be accepted?' Dt 33" 'Bless, 
Lord, his substance, and a. the work of his hands.' 
It is then sometimes followed by ' of ' : Gn 32"-* 
' I will appease him with the present . . . per- 
adventuie he will a. of me' (RV 'accept me'); 
2 Mac 13^ ' And the king accepted well of Mac- 
cabijeus.' ' Accept ' or ' accept the person ' is often 
the translation of Heb. c'jS k^j 'to lift up the 
face,' i.e. to look favourably on : Job 42* ' The 




Lord also accepted Job ' ; Pr 18» ' It is not pood 
to a. the person of the wicked.' This Heb. idiom 
has been tr. into (Jr.. iind is found in the NT as 
ToocruTTov \au3di'(.>.\ ahviiys in a bad sense, ' par- 
tiality,' of persons.' Lk 20" 'Neither 
acceptc-i .i<3 person of any'; Gal 2* 'God 
acceptetli no man's person.' Then this phrase is 
turned into vpoffotvoX^n'f'rvi (Ac KF* 'respecter 
of persons '), TpoffwrroXrit^irHu (Ja 2^ ' have respect 
to persons,' RV ' of persons '), and irpoffU}vo\riiJ.\(/ia 
('reTpfli^t of persons^ Ro 2", Eph &>, Col S'^, 
Ja L"i. thvr \\Mi,!, i,)und nowhere but in the NT 
and ( in cccics. writers. The English 
' accept the person ' is derived from the eccles. Lat. 
acceptare personam. 2. Acceptable is used in the 
sense of ' favourable ' : Is 40* ' In an a. time have 
I heard thee ' ; Gl'^ ' To proclaim the a. year of the 
Lord ' {i.e. the year of Jehovali's favour). 3. Ac- 
cept«tion= favourable reception, is found in 1 Ti 
11/49 . worthy of all a.' 

LiTERATCRi. — Lightfoot on Gal 29; Sanday and Headlam on 

J. Hasting.s. 
ACCEPTANCE.— Jccep< and coj^iate words are 
used in Scripture to denote the relation of favour 
and approval in which one man may stand to other 
men, and especially to God. Of the various 
phrases employed to convey the idea, those of most 
frequent occurrence are in OT, n^j ' to raise,' and 
!vn ' to associate with, have pleasure in,' and in 
NT, evap^ffToi, ' well pleasing.' The conditions of A. 
with God appear in UT partly as ceremonial, partly 
as moral and religious. Purifications and sacrifices 
(which see) are necessary in view of human 
ignorance and sin. But the sacrifices must be 
otlered in a spirit free from greed or deceit. To 
enforce the moral disposition Avhich must accom- 
pany every offerinp, is one of the great functions of 
the prophets. When the covenant has been 
established between God and Israel, entrance into 
it becomes a condition of receiving, and especially 
of having a i<iyfiii ns^urnnoe of, the divine grace 
and favour. >• ! 1 1 1 1 1 : ! 1 1 \ i u N T, A. is set forth as only 
in Jesus Christ and lor His sake (Eph 1^, 1 P 2'') ; 
and, as the history of the patriarchs presents us 
with living pictures of what is acceptable to God 
under the old covenant, so Jesus is Himself the 
Beloved Son in whom the Father is well pleased 
(Mt 3" 17'), and the type of all that God receives 
and approves. A. Stewart. 

ACCESS.— This word (not found in OT) occurs 
in NT in Ro 5^, Eph 2" 3'^ as the rendering of 
rpoffayuYfi. The Gr. word may express either an 
actual ' bringing near,' or ' introduction,' or merely 
a 'means of access,' or 'aright to approach.' In 
class. Gr. the idea suggested might be that of 
'introdv '■ '•> the presence-chamber of a 
monar< (3T associations of the kindred 

verb IT/. ..-,... .,eem to connect the word rather 
with the peculiar relation in which Isr. stood to J", 
and to give the term a special appropriateness in 
describing the admission of Gentiles into a new 
covenant relation with God {r^y X'^P'-" ra^n-riv, 
Ro 5^ cf. Enh 2'^), cf. Ex 19« and 1 P 3i» ; and the 
approach of Christian worshippers to the Father 
(Eph 2'" ."'-1 .f T.v 1" etc., Lv 4", Mai 1", E7:k 44" 
etc. 'I :.a is worked out in d( t.iil in He 

lO"-''. it to approach' or 'our introduc- 

tion' is uii !< "scribed by St. Paul (cf. 

Jn 14»)asgi ("hri-st. 

J. O. F. " 

ACCO, AV Accho Cisi).— This city. in 

th.. l.,f .,{^r (Jg pi), was nevui ,...v,„ by 
it different times as Ptolemais 



etc., the uli, 

'Akka. Jo 

St. Jean d'Acre, Accaron, Aeon, 
Acco survives in the Arab 
lis it 'a luaiitiaic city of 

Galilee' (BJ ir. x. _'). It was important as com- 
manding the coa^L road, and affording easy access 
to the great routes crossing the plain of Esdraelon. 

From the promontory of Carmel the shore sweeps 
northward with a beautiful inward curve, forming 
the Bay of Acre, on the northern extremity of 
which the city stands. From Bos en-Nakin-ah, in 
the north, the mountains recede some miles from the 
coast, leaving a fertile plain, which is bounded on 
the south by the Carmel range. It is watered by 
fhe Kishon (d Makatta) and Nahr Na'amAn, the 
ancientBelus. The plain furnishes Haifa,Nazareth, 
Tiberias, and Safed with half their supply of fruit 
and vegetables, sending also much to Beyrout. 

Of the 10,000 or 12,000 inhabitants, two-thirds are 
Moslems, the remainder being Greek and Catholic 
Christians, with a few Jews and Persians. It is 
the seat of a provincial governor, under whom are 
the districts of Haifa, Nazareth, Tiberias, and 
Safed. The chief trade is the export of grain 
brought by camels from Haurdn. About 1000 tons 
of oil from the olive groves of Galilee are also 
annually exported. Entered from the south by a 
single gate, it is defended to landward by a double 
rampart, to seaward by a strong wall. Tne ancient 
inner harbour has disappearea, and the outer is 
used only by smaller vessels, the neighbouring 
anchorage of Haifa being more safe and convenient 
for larger ships. 

Few cities have had a stormier history. Allied 
with Sidon and Tyre in tlie days of Eluleus against 
Shalmaneser IV. (Ant. IX. xiv. 2), it was taken by 
Sennacherib, and given by Esarhaddon to the king 
of Tyre. Held in succession by Babylon and 
Persia (Strabo, xvi. 2. 2.5), on the division of 
Alexander's kingdom it fell to Ptolemy Soter. Its 
strategic value was proved in the Syro-Egyp. wars. 
Betrayed to Antiochus the Great (B.C. 218), it was 
immediately recovered by Egypt. Simon INIaccabaeus 
defeated and drove the forces of Tyre, Sidon, and 
Ptolemais into the city (1 Mac 5"^; Ant. XII. viii. 2). 
Alex. Balas took it by treachery, and there married 
Cleopatra, daughter of Ptolemy I'hilomctor (Ant. 
XIII. ii. 1, iv. 1, 2). Demetrius Nikator gave it to 
Jonathan ' for the necessary expenses of the temple' 
(1 Mac 10^). Here Jonathan was perfidiously taken 
byTiyphon(^n<. xiii. vi. 2). Besieged by Alexander 
Janna3us, relieved by Ptolemy Lathyrus (Ant. xill. 
xii. 4), it was captured by Cleopatra, wlio ;,'ave 
it to the Syrian monarchy (Ant. XIII. xiii. 2). 
Tigranes the Armenian having taken the city, 
at once retired (Ant. xill. xvi. 4 ; BJ l. v. 3). 
Falling to the Parthians (Ant. XIV. xiii. 8; B-T i. 
xiii. 1), it finally passed under the power of IJoine, 
and was raised to the rank of a colony, v.ith the 
title, ' Colonia Claudii Cresaris rtolein.iis.' Herod 
built here a gymnasium (BJ I. x.\i. 11). It is 
last mentioned in Scripture in connexion with St. 
Paul's visit (Ac 2F). \V. Kwixg. 

ACCOMPLISH.— The primary mean in tr ■ 
bring to a successful issue. But tlie onlv . 
of this in the AV ;irr. Ps VA\ Pr U^\ 1 V.^V\ Ae 21\ 
Sometimes a. simply means to 'do,' 'perform': 
1 K 5», Jth 2^8, Is bo"^^ ' it (God's word) shall .a. that 
which I please.' It is occasionally used in tlie 
obsolete sense of ' to complete a period of time ' : 
Jer. 25** 'when seventy years are accomplished'; Is. 
40^^ 'her warfare is accomplisheil' ; Job 14" 'till 
he shall a., as an hireling, his day.' From this 
arises its most frequent meaniiiLr, to liriui: to 
an ideal or divine completeness, to fnllil : in) 
prophecy (once only), 2 Ch 36^" ; (b) Co.l's wrath, 
La -I", Fzk (!i2 T^'lS'* 208-21; (g) Christ's work, 
l.k .'' 1- ' is' j-iW Jn 19=8. The RV has 
soiiuht to reserve this meaning for the word 
' fulfil,' but unsuccessfully. 

J. Hastings. 





1. ' Of its own accord ' is used in the special sense 
■ of tciihout human agency in Lv 25* ' That which 
groweth of its (see Its) own a.,' and in Ac 12^* 
' which ojjened to them of his own a.' From the 
Gr. in both passages (airhnaroi) we get our word 
I 'automatically.' In 2 Co 8" 'of his own a. he 
went unto you,' the Gr. (aidalperm) is lit. 'self- 
chosen,' of his o^vn free choice. 2. In Is 59^ 
; ' Ace. to their deeds, accordingly he will repay ' : 
\ ' ace. to ' and ' accordingly ' are translations of the 
same Heb. word, and have the same meaning. 3. 
In Ezk 42^^- ^ ' ace. to ' means ' corresponding to.* 

4. As verbal adj. ' according' is found only in Wis 
18^* ' an iU a. cry ' (da^fupuwos, RV ' in discord ') : of. 
Jri Memoriam — 

"Chat mmd and sool, aocoiding w^ 
Ifay make one imiac.' 

T H \ *s 'i*i vf Q 
ACCOS ('Aicx^y, 1 Mac 8^^.— Eupolemus, the 
j son of John, the son of Accos, was one of the 
envoys sent to Rome by Judas Maccabaius in 
161 B.C. Accos represents the Heb. Hakkoz 
(fipr), which was the name of a priestly family 
(1 Ch 2-4**, Ezr 2^) ; Eupoiemus, therefore, may 
well have been of priestly descent. 

H. A. White. 
ACCOUNT. — As a snhst. a. is either literally 
the number counted, as Ec 7^ ' Counting one by 
one, to find out the a.' ; or metaphorically ' reckon- 
ing ' (Gr. X6701, ' word '), as Ro 14^ ' Every one 
of us shall give a. of himself to God.' As a verb 
a. is used in rare or obs. meanings. 1. To estimate, 
as Dt 2"^ ' That also was a*^ a land of giants ' ; 
Ro 8** ' We are a*^ as sheep for the slaughter ' ; 
He 11^9 ' a*^ that God was able' ; He 11^ RV 'a*"* 
(AV, 'esteeming') the reproach of Christ greater 
riches.' Cf. 1 Mac 6* ' He made a, [iXayiffaTo) that 
he should die.' Then it is sometimes followed by 
' of,' as 1 K ICP ' It (silver) was nothing accounted 
of in the days of Solomon ' ; 1 Co 4* ' Let a man 
so a. of us as of the ministers of Christ.' 2. To 
' reckon ' or ' impute,' as Gal 3* ' It was a"* (RV 
' reckoned ') to him for righteousness.' 3. To 
'seem,' or 'be reputed,' as Mk 10*^ 'they which 
area'^ (Gr. oi Sonovrrei) to rule over the Gentiles' ; 
so Lk 22^^. Cf. Gal 22- « 'those of repute' (Gr. 
oi SoAToiWes). J. HASTEfGS. 

ACCURSED.— In AV DTft hertm is tr. • accnrsed ' 
in Jos 6'" 7-2 mj. and 'a. thing' in Jos S'*"* 7***»- 
u. u. 15 2220^ 1 Ch 2^ In all these places RV gives 
'devoted' or 'd. thing.' For the lyertm is not 
accursed from God so that we may make what 
secular use of it we please, but devoted to God, and 
not to be used by us at all. A. is also the tr. of 
avadefui, anathema, in Ro 9» 1 Co 12» Gtall*- ». In 
these passages RV simply transliterates the Greek. 


ACHAIA ('Axafa), when Greece was free, was the 
strip of land bordering the Corinthian Gulf on the 

5. ; but, by the Romans, the name Achaia was 
applied to the whole country of Greece, because 
the Achaean League had headed Greek resistance to 
Rome. Conquered and united with the province 
of Macedonia in B.C. 146,* Achaia was in B.C. 27 
made a separate province ; and Thessaly, uEtolia, 
Acamania, and some part of Epirus, together with 
Eubcea and the western, central, and southern 
Cyclades, were included in it. It was governed by 
an official with the title Proconsul (Ac 18"), who 
was appointed by the Senate from among the 

* This fact, botlj dispated for a time ainoe ISiT, is now gener- 
ally admitted ; bat A. was treated m<M« easily than some pro- 
Tinces ; Athens (and Delos, irtiich seeX Scyon (which recared 
part of the territory of OorinthX Sparta (iHiicii was free tecan 
taxation and bead <i the BenthendakoDes) receiving spedaUy 
faToaraUe terms : see 1 Mac IfiS. 

ex-prsetors ; and not less than five years must have 
elapsed between his praetorsliip and his proconsul- 
ship. Corinth was the capital of the province, and 
the proconsul's ordinary residence (Ac 18"). As 
the severity of taxation was a subject of complaint, 
Tiberius, in a.d. 15, reunited Achaia with Mace- 
donia and Moesia under the administration of an 
imperial legatus ; but in 44, Claudius made it again 
a senatorial and proconsular province. Either at 
this or some later time, Thessaly was divid^ 
from Achaia and united with Macedonia, and 
Epirus with Acamania was made a separate pro- 
curatorial pro\-ince (as Ptolemy m., § 13. 44-46, and 
§ 14, describes them). On 28th November, A.D. 67, 
Nero at the Isthmian games declared Greece free; 
but within a few years Vespasian again made 
it a senatorial province ; and, so long as the 
empire lasted, it was governed by a proconsul, 
under whom were a legatug and a qtuestor. The 
proconsul and his legatus were r^nlarly jmnn^l 
officials, and so was the qnsestor alwajrs, bat an 
imperial legatus governed for a much longer term 
(two ruled from A.D. 15 to 44). In ordinary Gr. 
usage, the term 'HeUas' corresponded approxi- 
mately to the Rom. sense of Achaia ; and in that 
way 'EXXis is mentioned in Ac 20^. But there was 
a wider sense of the epithet ' Greek,' according to 
which Macedonia could be thereby designated; 
and thus Achaia and Macedonia together constitute 
the Gr. lands in Europe, and are sometimes coupled 
as a closely connected pair (Ac 19*^; cf. Ro 15", 
2 Co 9*, lThl8). 

The existence of Jewish settlements and syn- 
agogues in Corinth and Athens, the two greatest 
cities of Achaia, is attested in Ac 17" 18*- ^ ; and 
is suggested elsewhere by the rapid foimdation of 
new churches in Achaia' (1 Co 2^ Ac 18*^). The 
presence of Jews is proved in Sparta and Sicyon as 
early as B.C. 139-138 through the letters addressed 
to those States by the Rom. Senate, 1 Mac 15^; 
and in Bceotia, ^tolia, Attica, Argos, and Corinth 
by a letter of Agrippa to CaU^nla, Philo, leg. ad 
Gaiuni, § 36 (Mang. iL 587). Jewish inscriptions 
hare been found at Athens, Patrse, and iEgina. 

LnxRAirrKX. — There is a good article on Achaia in Fanly- 
Wlsaowm, RS : see also Xanpiardt, Bom. Staatseeru/. L p. 3211; 
MonmiBen, Pttnineet qfBtim. Bmp. (£dm. Gta^ t.) di. tiL 

W. M. Ramsay. 
ACEUUCUS ('Axour^i).— The name is Roman (see 
COBHTTH), and appears to have been perpetnatted 
in the family of L. Mummius, who earned it by his 
conquest of Corinth and Achaia, B.C. 146. The A. 
of 1 Co 16" may have been a freedman or client of 
the Mummii. In company with Stephanas and 
Fortunatus he had appearea at Ephesus, and had 
' refreshed the spirit of St. Paul, and, he adds, 
of the Corinthians also ; they thus ' supplied ' 
something which 'was lacking' on the part of 
the Corinthians. This suggests that they were 
distinct from (1) the bearers of the Cor. letter 
(1 Co 71) to St. Paul ; and from (2) oi XX<5ij$ (1 Co 1^^), 
who had more recently brought hack to Ephesus 
the disquieting news, under the fresh impression 
of which 1 Co was written. (See Steph.\xa.s, 


ACHAN (•??, in 1 Ch 2^ i?;?, Sept. 'Ax<fp, prob. 
the correct form of the name, cf. 'Valley of 
Achor'). — A man of the tribe of Judah, son of 
Carmi, also called (Jos 22^) son of Zerah, who 
was Ms great-grandfather. After the fall of 
Jericho, he coveted and took a portion of the spoil, 
which had been devoted to utter destruction. This 
sin in the devoted thing, involving the breach of a 
vow made by the nation as one body, brought 
wrath upon jlU Israel, and their first attack upon 
Ai was repulsed with the loss of thirty-six men. 




Investigation was made by lot to discover who had 
sinned, and Achau was singled out. He made full 
confession of his guilt, and the stolen treasure was 
found hid under his tent. Instant execution fol- 
lowed. Not only Achan himself, but his tent, his 
goods, his s]>oil, his cattle, and liis children, were 
taken to the valley, afterwards called the valley 
of Achor. There tliey stoned him, and all that 
belonged to him, afterwards consuming the whole 
with lire, and raising over the ashes a great heap 
of stones. This act of vengeance is represented 
OS being in some measure an expiation of the 
crime. ' The Lord turned from the fierceness 
of His anger.' The supposition that his family 
were acccs-sories to his crime finds no support in 
the narrative. The language of Jos T^ ('all 
Israel stoned him with stones, and they burned 
them with fire') has been regarded as imjjlying 
that Achan alone suffered the death penalty, the 
plural number referring to the oxen, asses, and 
sheep, and that his sons and daughters were 
brought to the valley merely as spectators, that 
they might have a terrible warning. It is doubt- 
ful if the t«xt will l>ear this construction, and the 
sweeping nature of the act of judgment recorded is 
rather to be explained by reference to the stage of 
moral developmtait which Israel had reached at 
the time (Jos 7**). K. M. Boyd. 

ACHAR.— The form in 1 Ch 2', 2 Es 7=* of the 
name ACUAN (wh. see). 

ACHBOR (liajy 'mouse' or 'Jerboa').—!. An 
Edomite (Gn 36^). 2. A courtier under Josiah, 
mentioned as one of the deputation sent by the 
king to Huldah the propiietess ; son of Micaiah 
(2 K 22'«- "), and father of Elnathan ( Jer 26- om. 
LXX, 36>-). Called Abdon (2 Ch 34-^). 


ACHIACHARUS ('Axtdxapos B, 'Axelxapos n, ip'pK 
Aram, and Heb., nvnxSvr. ), the nephew of Tobit, 
was governor under barcliedonus = Esarhaddon 
(To 1" etc.), or, according to the Aramaic 
text, ' Rab over all that was his (the king's), 
and Shalit over all the land of Assyria ' ; cf. 
Dn 2*8. The nearest Hebrew name is Ahihud 
(•"J-ng), 1 Ch 8^. J. T. Marshall. 

ACHIA8.--An ancestor of Ezra (2 Es P), omitted 
in Ezr and 1 Es. 

ACHIM i'Axd/x.). — Perhaps a .shortened form of 
Jehoiachim, an ancestor of our Lord (Mt 1"). See 

ACHIOR i'Axiwp, -iiK'ntt 'brother of light').—!. In 
LXX Nu 34« for Ahihud. 2. In Jth (5» et<!.), 
a general of the Ammonites, spokesman for the 
Jewish cause, and afterwards convert (ch. 14). 3. 
In Vulg. To 11" by mistake. F. C. Porter. 

ACHIPHA (B 'Axeipd, A 'Ax*^, AV Aclpha), 
1 Es 5^'.— His children were among the 'temple 
servants' or Nethinim who returned with Zerub- 
babel. Called Hakupha, Ezr 2^\ Neh 7». 

ACHI8H (et-jf, 'A^xoi^t).- The king of Gath to 
whom David fled for refuge after the massacre of 
the priests at Nob. Finding himself recognised 
as the slayer of Goliath, David feigned madness, 
and so escajHjd from the Phil, court (1 S 21'"). 
(This incident belongs to one of the later documents 
of Samuel.) In 1 S 27' (belonging to the Judaic 
or earliest document) A. is called 'the son of 
Maoch ' (possibly = ' son of Maacah,'! K 2=»), receives 
David with his band of 600 men, and assigns him 
the city of Ziklag in the S. of Juduh. Despite the 
wishes of A., the other Phil, princes refuse to let 

David take part in the final campaign against 
Saul. J. F. Stenxixo. 

ACHHETHA (KOJ?n«i, 'EA^<£ravo),the cap. of Media, 
mentioned Ezr 6* as the place where State docu- 
ments of the time of Cyrus were preserved. The 
Aram, form of the name employed in Ezr (LXX 
'Afxadd) closely resembles the Pehlevi jKnsn (Bunde- 
hesh, p. 23, i. 4), derived from the Old Pers. hang- 
matana (Behistan Jnscr. II. xiii. 8), derived by 
liawlinson from ham and gum, with the meaning 
'meeting-place.' This Old Pers. form, accommo- 
dated to the Greek pronunciation, gave rise to the 
name Agbatana or Ecbatana (To 6", Jth F"*), and 
survives in the modern Hamadan (34" 8' N, 48" 3' 
E), the cap. of the province of Persia l>earing the 
.same name, Avith which the ancient (;ip. of Media 
is ordinarily identified. Hamadan Ji( - ,it l lie foot 
of Mt. Elwend, ' whence it derives a coj)ious water 
supply, and in a plain thickly besprinkled with 
vineyards, orchards, and gardens, but whose 
elevation is 6000 ft. above the sea ; it enjoys one of 
the finest situations in Persia ' (Curzoa' Persia^ 
i. 566). This is clearly the Ecbatana of To 6', 
where it is represented as lying midway between 
Nineveh and lihages ; and also of Stralx), xi. 523, 
who knows of it as the summer residence of the 
Parthian kings ; for which its elevation and con- 
sequently cool clim.ate suited it. But the ancient 
cap. of the Median empire, built, according to 
Herodotus (i. 98, 99), by the first king Deioces 
(c. 700 B.C.), 'with walls of great size and strength, 
rising in circles one within the other,' each wall 
being coloured to correspond with one of the seven 
planets, is to be sought, ace. to Sir H. Rawlinson 
(JUGS x., art. 2, and ad I.e. Herod.), not at 
Hamadan, but at Takht-i-Sulayraan (36^ '25' N, 
47^ 10' E) in Adherbijan, the ancient Atropatene, 
distinguished from Media Magna. The Armenian 
historian, Moses of Chorene (ii. 84, ed. Whiston), 
speaks of the ' second Ecbatana, the seven-walled 
city ' ; and in the very learned paper quoted, 
Rawlinson (1) identifies that city with the Gazaka 
of the Greeks and Ganzak oi the Armenians ; 
(2) identifies Ganzak with the Shiz of Mohammedan 
writers ; and (3) localises Shiz at Takht-i-Sulayman, 
where a conical hill, surrounded by ruins, which 
enclose a lake that has attracted the observation of 
ancient and modern travellers, corresponds with 
the description of Ecbatana given by Herodotus, as 
McU as with what that historian tells us of the char- 
acter of the surrounding country (i. 110). Hama- 
dan, which lies at the foot of a mountain, would 
not admit of being fortified in the way described ; 
and, though search has been made l>y numerous 
explorers (see Polak in Mittheilungen dcr Wiener 
Gcvgraph. Gesellschaft, 1883, art. 1), no traces have 
been discovered of buildin<;s such as Herodotus 
mentions. The description in Jth (1''*), to whiclw 
no historical value attaches, would seem to refer to 
the same city as that of Herodotus ; and another 
record of the impression created by the strength of 
its fortifications is, according to Rawlinson, to be 
found in the account of Var in the 2nd Fargard 
of the Vendidad. D. S. Margoliouth. 

ACHOR Valley (lia;; p-^y 'valley of trouble,' 
Jos 7"*- 2a 15?^ ig g5io^ pj^g 2").— In the last passage 
the name may perhaps not be geogTaj)hical. The 
valley was near Jericho, but its exact position is 
not quite certain. It appears, however, from its 
connexion with the border of Judah, to be 
probably Wddy Kelt, a deep ravine close to the 
site of the Jericho of the Christian era. The 
stream becomes a foaming torrent after rains, 
and, issuing into the plains, runs between steep 
banks soutli of modern Jericho to the Jordan 
(SWP vol. iii. sh. xviii.). C. R. Conder. 



ACHSAH (n;;jr 'anklet,' 1 Ch 2» AV Achsa).— The 
daughter ol Caleb. She was promised in marriage 
by her father to the man who should capture 
Debir or Kiriath-sepher. Othniel, the brother 
(nephew?) of Caleb, accomplished the feat, and 
obtained the promised reward. As the bride was 
being conducted to her home, she lighted off her 
asij and besought her father to add ' springs of 
water' to the dowry of a south land (Negeb), 
which he had already given her. In response he 
granted her 'the upper springs and the nether 
springs ' (Jos 15"", Jg l»-«j. R. M. Boyd. 

ACHSHAPH (ir?»«).— There were perhaps two 
towns in Galilee of this name. 1. Noticed with 
places in Upper Galilee, may be the present El-Kesaf 
S. of the Leontes, on the mountains of Naphtau 
(Jos IP \2^). 2. A city of Asher (Jos \^), noticed 
with other to\»'ns near the coast, is more probably 
the mo<iem El - Yasif near Acre. This is also 
noticed by the Mohar, an Egyp. traveller (14th 
cent. A.D.) on his way down the coast. The loss 
of the letter caph in this name may be compared 
with the well-known case of Achzib (2). See 
SWP vol. i. sheets iL iiL, and Chabas, Voyage 
dun Egyptien. 0. R. Coxder. 

ACHZIB (anrK).— 1. One of the 22 towns of Asher 
(Jos 19^^ B 'Exko?, A 'Axff'^, in Jg 1" B 'A<Txoi-€», 
A ' Xffxevdei). It is identihed as Ez-Zib on the 
coast between Acre and Tyre, near where the level 
line of sand is broken by the promontory of Ras- 
en-Nakurah. The present village — a mere huddle 
of glaring huts on one of the highest eminences of 
the sandy sea-wall — has nothing to indicate that it 
was once a place of some note. It is mentioned in 
Jg l^i among the towns and districts that Israel 
failed to conquer. A. was called Aksibi by the 
Assyr., and Ecdippa by the Greeks and Romans. 
Josephus and Jerome refer to it. The Rabbin. 
^vriters, hedging the Land as they did the Book, 
marked out three districts, indicated by A., 
Antioch, and Mesopotamia. They inclined to the 
view that A. was on the outside of the first 
boundary line. All within was Holv Land, where 
bread, wine, and oil could be found ceremonially 
clean, and where the dates of the months and 
their fasts could be accurately known in time 
for observance. 

2. Another Achzib (B Kei"ei^, A omits), situated 
in the Shephelah or ' low-land ' of Judah, is men- 
tioned along with KeUah and Mareshah in Jg 15**, 
and with Mareshah and Adullam in Mic 1". This 
neighbourhood suggests a possible identification 
witt 'Ain-Kezbeh near Adullam. The name 
appears as Kezib (an^, X«ur/30 in Gn 38', and as 
Kozeba yt^^V^, B '£(axvOd. A Xwi>3a) in 1 Ch 4-. 
Some literary interest attaches to ^lic 1", where it 
is said that 'the houses of Achzib shall be a lie 
(Achzab) to the kings of Israel.' The resemblance 
seems to imply a play on the word. Occurring 
in a passage of vehement reproach, such derision 
corresponds to the spitting on the ground, which 
Orientals resort to when greatly excited and 
provoked — as an expression of uttermost nausea 
and contempt. G. M. 3kL\CKlE. 

reflexive verb, meanin-jr to make the acquaintance 
of, is found in Job "22-% Ec 2*. Cf. Shak.'s 
Temp. II. ii. 39 : ' Misery acquaints a man ^\-ith 
strange bedfellows.' Acquaintance is both sing, 
and plur., Ps 55'' 'But it was tliou, a man mine 
equal, my guide, and mine a.' (RV 'my familiar 
friend') ;" Lk 23** ' And all his a. and the women 
that followed him from Galilee.' Acquainted, 
meaning 'to be familiar with,' occurs Ps 139*, 
Is 53* ' a. with grief.' J. Hastixgs. 

ACROSTIC— A poem so composed that the initial 
letters of certain recurring periods (lines, distichs, 
etc.) follow some definite arrangements In the 
OT all the recognised acrostics are alphabetical, 
i.e. the initials make up the Heb. alphabet. They 
are Pss 9-10. 25. 34. 37. 111. 112. 119. 145, Pr 31'«^-'I, 
La 1. 2. 3. 4, Sir ol""* See also Hab \--2^. 
The periods assigned to each letter may consist 
of one line (Pss 111. 112), two (Pss 34. 145, etc.), 
three (La 3, etc.), or even sixteen lines (Ps 119); 
or the lines may vary in number, as esp. in 
La 1 and 2, and to some extent in the Psalms. 
Where the period consists of several lines, the initial 
letter is sometimes repeated with each line (La 3) 
or distich (Ps 119). In other respects the acrostics 
vary very much in style and subject, and, tliough 
usually late, undoubtedly belong to very different 
dates. Thus Pss 37 ancl 119 from their didactic 
style are e^^dently late, while the Jahwistic Ps 25 
is comparatively early. The acrostic character 
of these poems often "throws indirectly an inter- 
esting light on their history, showing us unmistak- 
ably the hand of the reviser, who sometimes did 
not scruple to disturb their alphabetical character. 
The most striking example of this is in Ps 9-10, 
originally one alphabetical psalm of usually four 
lines to each letter. This the rexiser cut into two, 
in Ps 9 adding w.'^*^=^ * as an appendix (comp. 
Ps 2.>^ 34-'), and omitting two or three verses 
after v.*. In Ps 10 the verses represented by d-s 
were omitted to make room for the insertion of a 
very curious and ancient fragment in w.*-". 
Somewhat similar, but less violent, alterations 
occur in Pss 25. 34 and 37. Thus in Ps 25 the 
insertion of 'n'Jx by the Elohistic re\Tjser (see 
Hexateuch) in v.^" gives k instead of 2 as the 
initial letter. It would seem also that v.^ has 
been substituted for a p verse, or else that the 
latter has been omitted. The omission of the i 
verse in Ps 145 appears to be accidental. It is 
interesting to notice that when the psalms are, 
from their stj'le and position in the Psalter, likely 
to be of late date, there is little or no interference 
with their alphabetical arrangement. The trans- 
position of the letters F and s in La 2 and 3 cannot 
easily be accounted for. 

Bickell, Zeitsch. fur KcUhol. Theol. (Innsbruck) 
1882, p. 326 fil, has shown that the conclusion of Sir, 
of which the original Heb. is now lost, was alpha- 
betical, the letters D-n, w.^'*, being eWdent at once 
from the Syr. version. It has also been maintained 
that Nah 1^-2^-' was originally alphabetical; but if 
so, the text has been so altered by revision or 
corruption that very few traces of this remain. 

Some critics claim to have discovered a name 
acrostic in Ps 110, the initials of 1-4, after omitting 
the introductory words, spelling jr^c ; but this 
coincidence can hardly be considered conclusive. 

F. H. Woods. 


i. Introdactioii. 
ii. Text and TnuasmisBioo. 
iii. Litenu7 Hi^oiy. 
iv. Modem Crit»asm. 
T. Purpose and Ccmtenta. 
vL Analysis. 

Tii. AuttMKship hnd Date. 
TiiL The Acts and Josei^os. 
ix. The Historical Yahie of the Acta. 

(1) A Priori ObiectimiB. 

(2) The Acts and St. PauTs Epistles. 

(3) The Archaeolo^cal Evidence. 

(4) The Period of Transition. 

(5) The Eariy Community in Jeraaalem. 

(6) The Speeches. 
X. Sources of Uie Acts. 

xL Conclnsion. 
xii. LiterMure. 

L The Acts of the Apostles, the fifth book in 
the English Canon, is unique in its character. 

* The verses are nombered in this article according to the 
Heb. Bible. 




While we have four separate narratives of the life 
of our Lord, and a very considerable number 
of letters by different apostles, it is the only 
history of the early Cliurch that can make any 
claim to bo authentic. Some writers indeed, such 
as Holtzmann {Ilandkommentar, p. 307), suggest 
that it is to be put on the level of other works 
written in the second century recording the deeds 
of the apostles ; but such a position is quite 
untenable. Even if some of them, such as the 
Acts of Paul and Thecla, may rest on an historical 
basis, that is the most which can be admitted. 
The greater number of them, most notably the 
Clementine liomances, for which there was once 
claimed almost an equality with the Acts, are 
now decisively thrown to a later date. The Acts is 
the sole remaining historical work which deals with 
the beginnings of Church history ; and this 
amongst other causes has made it a favourite mark 
of modem criticism. 

ii. Text and Tkansmission.— Although our 
authorities for the transmission of the Acts are in 
the main similar to those for the Gospels, they are 
fewer in number. Like the Gospels, it is contained 
in the five leading Uncials (k A B C D), in the Vulg., 
in the Peshitta and Harclean Syriac, in the two 
chief Coptic VSS, and there are quotations from it 
in the leading Fathers. Two sources are, however, 
defective. We have nothing corresponding to the 
Curetonian and Sinaitic Syriac, nor do we even know 
whether such a text existed ; and the Old Latin is 
very inadequately represented. On the other hand, 
we possess one other Uncial of considerable im- 
portance, namely, the Codex Laudianus (E) of the 
Bodleian Library, Oxford, a bilingual MS. of the 
Acts only. In later Minuscules it is generally 
found forming one volume with the Catholic 

The inadequate representation of the Old Latin 
and the absence of an old Syriac text are to be 
regretted, owing to the fact that the particular 
textual phenomena which they exhibit meet us in 
some authorities of the Acts in a very conspicuous 
form, namely, what is called the Western text (by 
Sanday and Ueadlam, Romans, p. Ixxi, the 5 text ; 
by Blass, Acta Apostolorum, p. 24, the /3 text). 
This is represented more or less definitely by the 
two bilingual MSS. D E, by the mar^nal readings 
of the Harclean Syriac, by the Old Latin so far as 
we can recover it (Codex Gigas, Floriacensis, and 
similar fragments, with the Paris MS. Latin 321, 
edited by M. Berger), and by Western Fathers, 
esp. Irenteus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lucifer, 
Augustine, Vigilius, Bede (some having a mixed 
text). The characteristics of this text are well 
known ; it adds passages of considerable length, it 
paraphrases, it sometimes seems to correct the 
shorter text ; and all these characteristics appear, 
but in a very much more marked form, in the Acts ; 
it sometimes gives a different aspect to a passage 
by the variations from the shorter text, sometimes 
its variations give additional and apparently 
authentic information. The problem of the origin 
of this text has cau.sed in recent years a consider- 
able amount of discussion. Some few critics, such 
as Bornemann (1848), have been bold enough to 
consider it the original text ; but that opinion has 
found few followers. Rendel Harris, in 1891, 
started a series of modem discussions by suggesting 
that the variations of Codex Bez.-© were due to 
lAtinisation, and implied the existence of a 
bilingual ALS. at least as early as 160 a.d. He also 
found signs of Montanist influence. His main 
theory was adequately refuted by Sanday in the 
Guardian (18th and 25th May 1892), who ascribed 
the recension suggested by the Westem text to 
Antioch. Ramsay, in 1892 {Church in Bom. Emp. 
p. 151, ed. 2), found evidence of a Catholic reviser 

who lived in Asia before the year 150, a locality 
which had already been suggested by Lightfoot 
(Smith's DIf i. p. 42), while WH suggest N.W. 
Syria or Asia Minor (Gr. Test. ii. p. 108). 
Dr. Chase, in 1893, attacked the problem from 
another side, accepting Antioch as the locality, 
and finding the principal cause of the variations m 
retranslation from the Syriac, a position he failed to 
make good. Lastly, Dr. Blass nas suggested that 
the author issued two editions, and that both forms 
of the text are due to himself personally, the one 
representing a rou^h draft, the other a revision : 
again, a theory which is hardly satisfactory (see 
Chase, Crit. Rev. 1894, p. 300 ff. ; Blass' reply 
begins in Hermathena, No. xxi. p. 122). 

A definite solution of the problem has not been 
attained, nor has it yet been attacked in a really 
scientific manner. A careful study of the MSS. D 
and E, and their relations, is necessary in order to 
eliminate their individual peculiarities. But in all 
probability the solution lies in the direction 
suggested by WH (p. 122 f.). If we compare 
the phenomena presented by the text of apocr. 
writings we find just the same tendency to varia- 
tion, but in an even more exaggerated form. 
Popular literature was treated with great freedom 
by copyists and editors. Immediate edification or 
convenience was the one thing considered. During 
the first seventy years of their existence, i.e. up to 
the year A.D. 150, the books of NT were hardly 
treated as canonical. The text was not fixed, and 
the ordinary licence of paraphrases, of interpre- 
tation, of aaditions, of glosses, was allowed. These 
could be exhibited most easily in early and 
popular translations into other languages. It was a 
process which would have a tendency to continue 
until the book was treated as canonical, and its 
text looked on as something sacred. Although 
some whole classes of readings may be due to one 
definite place or time, yet for the most part they^ 
represent rather a continuous process, and it is 
not probable that any theory which attempts to tie 
all variations down to a special locality or a definite 
revision will now be made good. 

In one point, however, WH's conclusions will 
require modification. It must not be forgotten 
that Westem authorities represent ultimately an 
independent tradition from the Archetype. It is 
quite conceivable, therefore, that in any single 
reading, which is clearly not Western in its 
character, they may preserve a better tradition than 
the MSS whose text Ave should usually follow. We 
must, in other words, distinguish Western reading.s 
from readings in Western authorities. For 
example, "EXXTjvaj read by A D in 11^ may be 

iii. The Literary History of the Acts is 
similar to that of the great number of books of 
NT. In the last quarter of the second century, 
when we begin to have any great extent of 
Christian literature, we find it definitely cited, 
treated as Scripture, and assigned to St. Luke. 
This is the case esp. with Irenaeus, who cites 

Eassages so continuous as to make it certain that 
e had the book before him substantially as M'e 
have it, but with many of the readings we call 
Westem. He lays stress on the fact that there is 
internal evidence for the apostolic authorship, and 
is followed in this by the Muratorian Fragment 
(Iren. Adv. Hcer. i. 23. 1 ; iu. 12. 12, 13. 3, 14. 1, 15. 1 ; 
iv. 15. 1). The book is also ascribed to St. Luke 
by Tertullian (De leiunio, 10) and Clement of Alex. 
{Strom. V. 12. § 83, p. 696, cf. Sanday, BL, p. 66f.) ; 
while undoubted quotations appear in Polycrates 
of Ephesus (Eus. Hist. Eccl. v. 24), in the letter 
concerning the martyrs of Vienne and Lyons {ib. 
V. 1 ), and a possible one in Dionysius of Corinth 
{ib. iv. 23). By this date the work is an 




integral portion of the Canon in all Churches, and 
there are no signs of any difference of opinion. Nor 
is there any reason for arg^iing that because our 
knowledge of it begins suddenly, therefore the 
book suddenly appeared in the Canon. We have 
no decisive evidence earlier, becatise we have no 
books to contain that evidence. Moreover, the wide 
area over which our evidence extends seems to 
imply that the ascription to St. Luke is a genuine 
tradition, and not a mere critical deduction. 

For an earlier period the industry of critics has 
collected a number of parallels, on which indeed, 
for the most part, no great stress can be laid ; but 
two lines of argument enable us to take the book 
farther back. The unity of authorship of the Acts 
and St. Luke's Gospel must be admitted as 
axiomatic, and it is quite clear that Tatian, Justin, 
and ilarcion were acquainted with St. Luke's 
Gospel. Now, the existence of St. Luke's Gospel 
implies the existence of the Acts, and this con- 
clusion is supported by a number of parallels 
between the Acts and Justin, which would not 
perhaps be by themselves of great weight (Ac 1^ 
=Ap. i. 50, '2?°=Dial. 68, l^=Dial. 16, \7^=Ap. 
ii. 10, 26^=IHal. 36, 76). The use of St. Luke by 
Marcion clearly carries the Acts back to the early 
part of the second century; but we can go still earlier. 
Among the apostolic Fathers there are suggestions 
of contact with Barnabas, Hennas, and Clement on 
which little stress can be laid, while Papias shows 
himself acquainted with the persons mentioned by 
St. Luke ; but in Ignatius and Polycarp (Ac 2*= 
Pol. 1, 10*2=Pol. 2, 20»=Pol. 2, T^'^Pol. 6, 8^ 
= Pol. 1-2, l=3 = Ign. Mag. 5, 6«=Ign. Phil. 11, 
l(H=I^'n. Smyn. 3) there are resemblances which, 
although slight, are so exact as to make the 
hypothesis oi literary obligation almost necessary, 
as Holtzmann even seems to think (EinieUung,^ 
1892, p. 4<36, 'there are stUl more noteworthy resem- 
blances with Jtistin, Polycarp, and Ignatius ). This 
last evidence is of increasing importance, as not 
only the genuineness but also the early date of the 
letters of Polycarp and Ignatitis is becoming daily 
better established, and these quotations almost 
compel tis to throw back the writing of the Acts 
into the 1st cent. — this is, of course, provided 
we accept the literary unity. If we accept the 
elaborate distinction of sotirces '(see.§ x.) whicli 
has become fashionable lately, no evidence at an 
early date is valuable except tor the words quoted. 

The history subsequent to the second century 
neeil not detain us. Some few heretics appear to 
have left the work out of the Canon, and 
Chrysostom complains that it was not much read 
in his time ; but it is always with him as with all 
other Church writers, one of the accepted books. 
Its place in the Canon varies. The ordinary 
position is immediately after the Gospels {Ew. Act. 
Cath. Paul, or Ew. Act. Paul. Cath.), and this is 
the place it occupies in almost all Gr. MSS. from 
the Vatican onwards, in the Mtiratorian Fragment 
and later lists, in Syr. and Lat. MSS. The order, 
Ei-v. Paul. Act. Cath., is that of the Sin., some 
Miausctiles, MSS of the Peshitta of the oth and 
6th cent., the Codex Fuldensis and Vulg. MSS 
from the 13th cent. A third order is Ew. 
Paul. Cath. Act , which is fotmd in the Apostolic 
Canons, 85, the Bohairic and perhaps the Sahidic 
MSS, in Jerome's Bible and Spanish Vulg. MSS. 
The only point of importance rn the order would 
be whetfier there was an early tradition grouping 
the ^\-rirings of St. Luke together. There is very 
little evidence of this. In some cases St. Luke's 
was placed fourth among the Gospels, but this 
happened, as a rule, in authorities which do not put 
the Acts next ; for example, the Codex Claromon- 
tanus and some Coptic authorities. There seems, 
however, some evidence for thinking that in 

Origen's time the order of the Gospels was Jn 
Mt Mk Lk, and that these were followed by the 
Acts. In the case of Irenaeus, however, our oldest 
evidence for Asia and the West, we find the Gospel 
already separated from the Acts and definitely 
groupeid with the other Gospels (Zahn, Gesc/uehte 
des Neutest. Kanons, ii. 3i3-383). 

iv. MoDERX Criticism.— 1. By far the most 
prevalent opinion concerning the Acts has always 
been, and still is, that which ascribes it to St. Luke 
the companion of St. Paul. This is the opinion, 
not only of those critics who are classed as ortho- 
dox, but of Kenan, whilst it has recently been 
maintained with great vigotir by Ramsay and 
Blass. It is, of course, compatible with very vary- 
ing estimates of its historical authority. WhUe 
Renan considers it valuable mainly as a witness to 
the opinions and ideas of the authors own time, 
Banisay, on the other hand, claims for St. Luke 
a place in the very first rank of historians — ».c. 
amongst those who have good material, who use it 
well, and who write their history with a very clear 
insight into the true course of events. Even he, 
however, admits that for the earlier portion its 
value is dependent on the value of the sources used. 

2. As soon as Baur began to develop his theory 
of Church history, it be«ime apparent that it was 
inconsistent with the Acts ; and partly arisin? from 
a comparison with the history recorded in the 
Galatians and for other critical reasons, but partly 
owing to a different d priori conception of whsi 
was the nattrre of the development of the early 
Church, an opinion has widely prevailed that the 
Acts presents us with a fancy picture written in the 
second century in the interests of the growing 
Catholicism of the day. This has been the view of 
Baur, Schwegler, Zeller (to whom we owe by far 
the fullest investigation on this side), Hilgenfeld, 
Volkmar, Hausrath, Holsten, Lipsius, Davidson, 
van Manen, and others. But in the extreme form 
in which it was held it is gradually being given up. 
Neither the late date nor the exaggerated view of 
the dilierences of parties in the early Church is 
really tenable. The unhistorical character comes, 
it is now said, rather from defective knowledge 
and insight, not from deliberate purpose, and the 
writer wrot« as he could rather than as he would. 
He represent>3, in fact, the opinions of his day, those 
of ' Heathen Christianity developing into Catho- 
licity' (Hamack, Hist, of DogvM,, Eng. tr. L 56). 
Moreover, few would care for a much later dat« 
than 100 A.D. ' The authorship by St. Luke would 
be just conceivable if some time about the year 80 
were taken as the terminus ad quern' (Holtzmann, 
Handkomm. p. 312). 

3. The school of Baur had the great merit of 
establishing the fact that the Acts is an artistic 
whole, that the wriiter had a clear conception 
of the manner in which the Church developed, 
and wrote with that idea always before him. 
In the last ten years a series of writers have 
attacked the question of the sources of the book 
(see § X. ) in a manner quite inconsistent with this. 
They have imagined a number of writers who have 
gradually compiled the book by collecting and 
piecing together scraps of other books, and by 
altering or cutting out such passages in the same 
as seemed inconsistent with their particular 
opinions. This view, in anything like an ex- 
treme form, is absolutely inconsistent with the 
whole character of the work. 

A sufficient amount has been said about the 
various opinions which have been held, and it will 
be most convenient to pursue our subsequent in- 
vestigations from the point of view which we con- 
sider most probable. 

v. Purpose A>f d Coxtexts. — The ptupose which 
the writer of the Acts had before him may be 





.\\ 11 |iii-ia' 'Miliiig aa it 

iiiii ;in;uiu : tli<- work. 

I'ulit iili-i'Ui II y. ill' lii'-iiis liy 

■, iMi;- liDuk ill I li'' \' 'Ti!- Ti.r /'■ I' 

\\.i. lo iir w II iir-,M-~ (if ilu! Lord 

.1 uda-a ami Saiuiir'ui, and to 

: !r' cailli. In ollici- udiils, 

ixioK is (Ij llic (iivini' crcdcuLiiils 

■xliibited in tlifir j,;irn-, and (2) 

..' ...wiii-l ill I lie ,|a;;i--- marked 

:id ^aillal■ia, the 

TToif u' Ti h.ui ()iOc;i/'f, tir ; i -i!' 11'' i: '-N I 'i" •_' i \ - 

K art of the sentencr. Ii- ]Mii)Hirt, li 
e gathered from t!i!' inlldw inu ^ 
apOHtles well' lo rrc,i\c- ilif ;:iu oi 111.' lioiy (.host 
and of ])o\\<r, 
in .li'i ii-a ! ill 
liir II! :• nil" 

tho sub)' ' ' . 
of the 11) ■ 
tli(» f\t.ii 1 ■ 

l._\ llir Willi!- 

ul 111 iiio-^l |ia : ; 

\\ 111 II \\i- (A.tiiiine the blruilurc of llii' l)ool<, we 
liiiil I hat it alnio-L exactly coric>iHiii(is \vitii these 
■ivokU. There is clear evidi-nn' ol' muthod. The 
\\i ill r lii'gins with the ennnu ration of the names 
ol the apostles and the membcis of lliu community. 
Then conies the gift of the Holy (jhost, and the 
immediate outburst of power. Then tlie preaching 
in -li rii~;ih 111. In tlii-; \vv notice tliat all signs of 
t h ;■) II iiiiir ]!ii\\ rj- anil r.ll j'oiiits which lead to the 
-|ii(:iil of I 111' ,L;n>|irl a ic .-]HTially noted. An in- 
:-taii;r of the lir-i i> the .--iniy of Aiiaiiia-^ JUid 
.Si|ipliini ; ol till' ia,-t. tlie way in w hie!! the diU'crent 
stages in the growth of the (hincli an' continually 
em pluisised (•_*"• ^" I'j. Inch. (> theie is clearly a 
new stall. Tile ;i]iiiointnient of t he seven is dwelt 
on, both lii'i-ause of tile ininiediate exhibition of 
jiowi 1 ill' I, and of tlie immense results 
which idildvid f mm the preaching of Stephen and 
till' [H i<ec,iiion which followed his death. 

In S' till- second .stage of progress is entered 
u]i(in. The word spreads to Samaria (■S'"-''). The 
e.Meiision of the gospel is suggested hy the story 

of the i'.thiopiau eiiniicli ^S- ;. la '.)'"■■' c(jines 

Sauls coin cision. an event of extreme importance 
lor the wiitds puiiiose. In 9^^ is given another 
snniinarv of the jtrogress of the riiurch — by this 
t ini" tlimu :hout all Juda'.a and (ialilee and Sam- 
aria. A series of incidents relating to the mis- 
siunary work of St. r<'ter now follows (!>■"-' d 1'"^), 
seli'iii'd as coiitainiM'j- the lirst delinile signs of the 
extension of I to the (ji'iitiles, 'Apa Kal 

Toh lOfiijii' ' rivoiOLV tis i'wijJ' iBuKfv. In 

11'' we rearh a i ulher stage. The word is 
liieacli.i] ill riiunicia and Cyiinis and Antioch, 
ain; lie (hunli nf Antioch is fonuded — the word 
lie: " thosi' who arc not Jews. 

In ! , of tlie word is dwelt on. 

An- ni I h. iiai ral i\e is ended. 

W i:;' or l-_'-'' what is cirarly intended to 

be u ii'N. 1,1 ]i:,ri me. The aniounl of preparation 
shoMs us the ini]ioitaiice that the atrthor attaches 
to tilt' liist silting out of l*;;ul and IJarnabas to- 
getliiT. and frniii this time on\\ards the narrative 
]Hd(iids Miy d' linitely forward until the time 
when St. I'aiil iiaches Home. We may again 
mark stnge- in tin- nanativi — IS^-H** — commonly 
called tlif til -t iiiis-iriiKiry journoy of St. I'aul ; 
in which Ul- iidticf tlie cniphasis luid on the 
cxhibilion ol oi/'cmv on Ihi' part of the ajiostie. 
In 1'' -' ciiiiii's till' a]io-I'ilie ciiuiicil: tlcn ].")■'"- 
•Jl lie fuillirr nii--ion;My enterprise of St. Paul. 
Here We no! ill' how it is always the points of 
ili'liartnie \\liiih are duelt on, as, for example, the 
liist preai hill.; in l^urope and \u ' ml im- 

l.orlant town-^. Then 21"-28"' tie .icnts 

which uliiniati'ly lead St. Paul i '.I ... . Here 
t hi- ;.'reat liiliie-^ of detail arises ]ia)|jy irom the 
better kiio-.v ! !.." of i)ie aiitlinr, jKirfly from the 
innwrtan the evi • I'aiil 

preaches ml kings, i I'^'irtly 

because they are all e\ en 
the gospel to Koine. Till 
I'aul pleachine. Iierausc 1 
the jmrjiose ol his narrative 

which help in takllli; 
the author iea\es St. 
las then accomplished 
Jlonie is fyjiical of 

the ends of the earth. A delinitc jjoint is 
and the narrative is delinitely concluded 
arguments in favour of the definite eoiiclii ,.,,, ,ji 
tho work, see Lightfooi in Smiili - /'/.'- i. l'T, as Kamsay, St. J'unl, ]i. SA.) 

The above sketch of the plan of the work iia-. at 
any rate, the merit oi heing an attempt t<j di~eo\ei 
the author's purpose by an examination of his own 
language. The fault of other views is that they 
exaggerate points of minor importance. A .series of 
writers from Schneckenburger (1841) onwards have 
seen in tho work a book of (conciliating teiidoncy, 
based on tin/ parallelism hetwe-en Si. I'eteraml St. 
Paul ; and t his \iew in a more or le-.~ inodilici form 
has been the ]ire\aiiin.L: <Mie. Ii lia-, a- will he 
suggested, this nincli tnitii, thai ilie writer would 
pass over for the mosi part incid(;nls ol a, less 
creditable ehiuacter; lie did not, however, do so, 
as this theory implies, bcc;uise he wislieil lo .nn- 
ceal anything (he gives us iiuite rdlii ie: 
of the existence of difrereiui' of opmioii 
2P"''). Ijiit because they did not help in i! 
of his work. He looks upon Chiisliaii :\ a~ 
a polity or society, and it is the growth 
society he depicts. The internal" history i 
at in so far as it leads to external growl:, 
view of Pileidercr and some (Hher.s is th.;' ;lie 
book was written from an apolo'^etic jiomi of 
view to defend Christianii.y .■i,_,iin-t .Ir ::iisni 
and paganism. With this ohjee;. like tin- later 
Christian apologists, the writer depicts tlie lioman 
authorities as, on the whole, favourable to Chris- 
tianity, while he represents the attacks as coming 
from the Jews. There is no doubt that he does so ; 
but the obvious reason for doing so was the fact that 
the author was narrating things as they Iiaj)pened, 
while he gives no hint that his W(_nk is intended to 
be apologetic. It is addressed to a believing ( hiis- 
tian, not to any outsiler. 

vi. Analysis. — A certain amount of di-en-sion 
has taken place as to whether the Acts should be 
divided into two or three main jiarts. All sucli 
discussions are thoroughly fruitless. Tie], .ne 
quite clearly definite stages in the mr':,; !\ i ami 
the writer is systematic. ANC i ve ihe 

structure, but we are at liberty \ Ii di\ i- 

sions as seem convenient — rememnenng that the 
divisions are not the writer's, but our own. The 
following is suggested as a convenient aualy-i- on 
the lines of the previous summary. The sjeeelK-j 
are italicised : — 


11-^3. Tlie .\i>ostolic Commission. 

! till :ipostles and the coiuplelion of 


(■,'-■. 'file .i)iii,)iiaiiiini f'i 
^ '-. 'riie i.:v,u'lnn,.r ,•! Se 

7' ■■'. n.r yl.,,rli ,,f SL ,,},■ ... 

■'' -'. Ill .eh el SI ([il II n :i 11.1 inrr-ecntioii of tlio Churotl. 
Tub Cm laju i.n Jud.ka and Samaki a. 

&■*■-'>. Philip in Samaria. Siiimn MaL;ii3. 
*>-^*>. rhilip and the Ethitiinau luiiiich. 
01-30. Conversion of Saul. 

SI. Kxtcnsion of the Church. 
JW-w. I'ftcr at Lydda and Joppa. 



KP-ts. CooTenion of Cornelius. Speech of Peter. 
lli-is. Dtacossion on the subject at Jerusalem. Speech 
qf Peter. 

Thk CuiRCH IX AsnocH. 

1119-as. Foundati(Hi of the Church in Anttoch. 
■-■*'. Collection for the poor in JeruMlem. Vaauaa 

of Paul and Barnabas. 
121-!^. Persecution of Herod. Peter thrown into nrMon. 
20^3. Death of Herod. 
-*. Progress of the Oiurch. 
l-yn-Xii. Barnabas and Saul sent f<»th from Antiodi. 

First Missies art Jor»XET or Paul axd Basxabas. 
13-m. Cyprus. Elvmas and Sergius Paulus. 
U-:3. .\ntloch in Pisidia. Speech of Paul to the JeKt. 
14^-". Iconium. 
3-3). Lystra. Speech of Paul to the GentUet. 
3-28. Visit to Derbe and return journey to Antioch on 
the Orontes. 
151-33. The apostolic council in Jerusalem. Speeehet of 
Peter and Jame*. Letter to the Churehe*. 

BECojiD Mjssiosakt Joukxet of St. Pauu 
1536_i6S. The Churches revisited. 

*-•*. Journey into Europe. Philippi. 
171-13. Thessalonica and BertEO. 
!**». Athena. Speech of Paulin the Areopagyu. 
l*l-ls. Corinth. 
19-21. Return to Antiodi in Syria. 
— . Visit to Jerusalem. 

Tbikd Missioxart Jocrxet. 
1&23. Visit to Galatia. 
2*^23. ApoUoe at Ephesus. 
191-^1. Paul at Ephesus. Disturbance in tiie theatre. 
201-* Journey in Macedonia and Greece. 
"12. Troas. 
13-2116. Journey to Jerusalem. Speech to eldert of 
E]^hetutat MUetu*. 

Paul ix Jercsai^esi. 

21l~-*o. Disturbances arise. 
-221-21. PauTs tpeeeh to the people. 
22--2311. Paul before the Sanhedrin. 
13^. Paul sent to Caesarea. 
241-2^. Paul and Felix. Speeehet of Tertutliu and Paul. 
25-36. Paul and Festus. Speech before Agrippa. 
27-281*. Journey to Borne. 

Paul ix Roste. 

2Si'3i. Interview with the Jem. Paul begiia to preach. 

vii. Authorship axd Date. — The following 
arguments enable us to li.x with a considerable 
approach to certainty the authorship of the Acts. 

(1) It is quite certain that it is ^vritten by the 
author of the third Gospel. This is shown by the 
preface, which, like that of the Gospel, is addressed 
to Theophilus, and shows that the author claims 
to have written such a (Jospel, and by the identity 
of style between the two books (the best and most 
recent demonstration is that of Friedrichi. This 
fact may be taken as admitted on all sides. 

(2) The presence of certain portions written in 
the first person, seems to imply that the writer 
was an eye-witness of some of the events he 
describes, and a companion of St. Paul. In the 
Acts there are certain passages which are tech- 
nically known as the ' we ' sections, viz. 16^®"" 
205-13 .211-13 27^-28*. Here the writer speaks in the 
first person. Moreover, these sections and also 
the accompanying incidents, in which the writer 
does not take' part, but at which he was probably 
present, are presented with great fulness and 
exactness of detail, and seem to imply that the 
writer was an eye-witness. So far there is general 
agreement. But two explanations then become 
possible. Either the author of these sections was 
the author of the Acts, who changes the person 
when he becomes himself one of the companions of 
St. Paul, or these passages are one of the sources 
which the compiler of the work makes use of. All 
probability is in favour of the first view. The 
style of the ' we ' sections is that of the author. 
It is perfectly true, indeed, that the author works 
up his sources in his own phraseology, as may be 
seen by a study of the third Gospel ; but it is hardly 
possible to believe that a writer so artistic as the 
author of the Acts certainly is should have left 
these exceedingly incongruous first persons. So 

keenly has this been felt, that it has been suggested 
that the author introduced these sections in the 
first person to give an appearance of genuineness 
to his narrative — a suggestion which refutes both 
itaelf and some other theories. An examination 
of the scope of these sections lends itself to the 
same view. The first section begins at Troas 
(16**) and continues to Philippi (16'*); the second 
begins at Philippi (2(>'') and continues over the 
w^hole period to the end of the book, the third 
person being occasionally adopted, as in 16", when 
the event recorded concerns only St. Paul and 
some of his companions, and not the whole party, 
nor the author personally. The most reasonable 
explanation of that fact is that the writer of these 
sections joined the party at Troas and went to 
Philippi ; that after an inter\'al of some years he 
again joined St. Paul at Philippi, perhaps his 
native place, and accompanied him first to Jeru- 
salem and then to Rome. If any other hypothesLs 
be adopted, it is dilficult to account for the 
exceedingly fragmentary character of the sections. 
On the other side, it is argued that the 'we' 
sections are so much more historical in their 
character than some of the other sections, and so 
much fuller in detail, that they clearly betray a 
difl'erent hand. But the diJfference is never greater 
than would be found in pas.?ing from the work of 
an eye-witness to the work of one who, although a 
contemporary, is not an eye-witness. It is urged, 
again, that the work cannot be from the hand of 
a contemporary of the inexactness and 
incorrectness oi the knowledge of apostolic times 
which it exhibits. But tliis is really begging the 
whole question. We have no right to argue that a 
book is late because it is unhistorical, unless we 
have objective rea.sons for stating that it is so, which 
overpower the positive eWdence for the early date. 
The balance of probability is in favour of the 
author of the Acts being identical -vvith the 
author of the ' we ' sections, and therefore of being 
a companion of St. Paul, but a companion who 
joined the apostle somewhat late in his career, 
and who therefore could only have a second-hand 
acquaintance \tith earlier events. 

(3) The tradition of the Church from the end of 
the second century is that the author was Luke, a 
companion of St. Paul ; and this exactly corre- 
sponds with the circumstances already described. 
St. I.uke is the only companion of St. Paul, so far 
as our knowledge goes, who fulfils the conditions. 
The Acts could not have been written by Timothy, 
for Timothy was a companion during an interval 
when the ' we ' sections cease (Ac 17^*) ; nor by 
Titus, for we know from Gal 2* that he was \t-ith 
St. Paul earlier ; nor by Silas, who was at the 
council (Ac 15--). St. Luke is never mentione<l in 
any of the earlier Epistles, but he is in the later. 
Corroborative evidence of the Lucan authorship 
has been found in the medical terms used (Col 4", 
Lk8« Ac 288 etc.). 

(4) The argument in favour of the Lucan author- 
ship of both the Gospel and Acts, based on a chain 
of coincidences, has been put very strongly by 
Bp. Lightfoot. (a) Tradition gives to the Gospel 
the name of St. Luke, a companion of St. Paul. 
(b) Internal but unobtrusive evidence shows its 
Pauline character. It dwells particularly on the 
universality and freedom of the gospel ; and it refers 
to less obvious incidents in our Lords life mentioned 
by St. Paul (1 Co ll»=Lk 22»9, 1 Co 15*=Lk 
24**). (c) The Acts of the Apostles was certainly 
written by the same person as the Grospel. (ct) 
An independent line of argument shows that it 
was written by a companion of St. Paul, (e) It, too, 

! is Pauline in its character (so far as we are at 
I liberty to use that word). It represents the same 
'• universality and freedom of the gospel, and the 



same idea of the Christian Church, but more in the 
concrete (see Ramsay, St. Paul, pp. 124-128). 

(5) The balance of argument is clearly, then, in 
favour of St. Luke as author of the Acts. There 
is, however, still room for doubt as to the time 
when it was written, (a) One theory places it 
almost immediately after the close of the narrative, 
and just before the outbreak of the Neronian perse- 
cution. The book, it is urged, comes to an aorupt 
conclusion, and the only explanation is that it is 
unfinished. As has been pomted out above, there 
is no real reason for saying the book is unfinished. 
The arrival of St. Paul in Rome formed a suitable 
conclusion, and the ending is similar in character 
to the ending of the Gospel. In the extreme form 
this argunn-nt is untenable, but it is still quite 
possible to hold that the narrative concluded here, 
oecuuse not miiny more events had occurred. More- 
over, it mijjht be held that the tone in relation 
to the empire represented the period before rather 
than after the Neronian persecution. The early date 
is still held by Blass, and the arguments against it 
are not very strong. 

(b) The argument for a later date is generally 
based on Lk 21** as compared with Mt 24'', Mk 
13". It is stated that tne form of the prophecy 
there recorded has been modified by the knowledge 
of what happened at the siege of Jerusalem. The 
Gospel therefore was written after that event, and 
the Acts somewhat later, under the Flavians. The 
criticism of Blass, however, has very considerable 
weight, that there is little in the prophecies re- 
corded by St. Luke which goes mucn beyond the 
language of Dn 9^ ; and the reason given for a 
late date can hardly be considered demonstrative. 
Neither can that of Ramsay, who thinks that the 
Gospel must have been written just after Titus 
was associated in the empire with his father, so as 
to explain the incorrect date of Tiberius (Lk 3'). 
No arguments are certain, and the language of Lk 
21** would in any case be quite compatible with a 
date some time oefore A.D. 70 ; but perhaps on the 
whole the amount of perspective contained in the 
book is hardly compatible with the earlier date, 
just as the relation of the third Gospel to the other 
two suggests the later date, and a period shortly 
after 70 is the most probable. "Whether we can, 
as Ramsay suggests, press the irpQyrov of P, and 
argue that a third treatise was in contemplation, 
is very doubtful. 

The following are dates suggested by various writers, and are 
for the most part taken from Uoltzmann: — 64-70 (Hug, A. Maier, 
Schneckcnburger, Hitzig, Grau, Nosgen, Blass), c. 80 (Ewald, 
Lechler, Bloek, Rcnan, Meyer, Weiss, Ramsay), 76-100 (Wendt, 
Spitta), 90 (Kostlin, Mangold), 95 (Hilgenfeld), c. 100 CV'olkmar), 
110-120 (Pfleidcrer), Trajan and Hadrian (Schwegler, Zeller, 
Overbeck, Davidson, Keun, Hausrath), 125-150 (Straatman, 
Mcijboom, van Manen). 

The arguments for a later date are pivcn most fiillv among 
recent writers by Holtzmann {Einlntxn 105) as 

follows: — (1) Acquaintance with the Pui. ■; (Rom, 

Gal, C!or, Ejih, Thess, and Heb),alsowith J< s , .liberate 

correction of the narrative of Gal 11" *< in Acts 1j-^m, of Gal 
21W in 15»-», of Gal 2" in Acte 153S^. (3) Unhistorical 
account of speaking with tongues (Ac 2*-ii), of St. Paul's 
relations with the law, and legendary narratives such as that 
of the death of Agrippa, 12*3. (4) The writer is contemporary in 
time with the literary activity of Plutarch as shown by the 
parallel lives; and of Arrian and Pausanias (narratives of 
Journey), also of the «>>;•«»« of different apostles. (6) Atmo- 
sphere of the Catholic Church ; parallelism of St. Peter and St 
nul ; traces of the bicrarchiou view of the Church, and esp. 
the sacramental theory of laying on of hands. (6) Resem- 
blances w4th the Pastoral Epistles. (7) Importance awigned to 
the political side of Christianity ; the Roman Empire always 
represented as favourable to Christianity. 

It is very difficult to deal with some of these 
objections quite seriously. Even if the use of the 
Pauline Epistles were proved, it is difficult to 
see what tnat has to do with the late date of 
the Acts. The contradictions with the Pauline 
Epistles are largely dependent on d priori views of 
Cnurch history. Some points, as the resemblance 

to Plutarch, are purely fanciful. The political 
point of view is exactly that of St. Paul's Epistles. 
One point requires perhaps slightly fuller investi- 
gation ; and the remaining points, so far as 
they are serious, will be best dealt with in an 
independent survey of the historical character of 
the work. 

viii. The Relation of the Acts to Josephus 
presents to us, under the auspices of modem 
criticism, a curious double problem. While older 
critics, like Zeller, contented themselves with 
pointing out historical discrepancies, later critics 
since Keim {Gesch. Jesu, iii. 1872, 134, and Aus dem 
Urchristenthum, 1878, 18) have attempted to show 
that St. Luke made use of Josephus. The crucial 
passage is that concerning Theudas (Ac 5^). In his 
speech Gamaliel is made to refer to a rebellion under 
a leader of that name; but according to Jos. this 
took place at least ten years later, under Cuspius 
Fadus, and long after tnat of Judas the Galilsean. 
So far the problem was simple, but it is now main- 
tained that the mistake arose from the misappre- 
hension of a passage of Josephus. In one paragraph 
he speaks about Theudas, in the next of tne Sons of 
Judas of Galilee, and this, it is maintained, is the 
origin of the mistake. The two passages are 
quoted thus — 

Acts 53«'- 

dyiffTT} QcvSdi \iywv 

etval Tiva eavrbv . . . flj 

a.vQp4$ri Kod irdyrei 8<rot 

iireldom-o aiiri^ duXOOrj- 

cav, K.r.X. 

'lovSas 6 FaXtXttios iv ratj 
riixipaii rris dwoypa.<pris 
KoX diriffTijcre \ai>v ojrtVw 

Jos. Ant. XX. V. 1 f . 

GeuSay . . . ireldei rbv 
vXuaTov iyXov 
■irpo<pTjTr)t yiip iXeyev elvai, 


$a5os . . . i^4ir€fi\f/€v 
tXijy liririuv . . . iir' ai>roi;j, 
ijrif . . . iroXXoili . . . 

■irpbs To&rois di Kal ol 
iraides 'lovdd tov VaXiXalov 
dirrjxOrjcrat' rou rbv Xabv 
dirb 'Pu/iaiiiiv diroo'Triaav- 
Tos Kvpivlov rijs 'lovdalas 

Now, whatever plausibility this comparison may 
have at first sight is very much diminished when 
we remember that the two passages in Jos. do not 
immediately follow one another, out are separated 
by an interval of 20 lines or more. Nor when we 
come to examine them do we find any close 
resemblance in the language. There are words 
common to both accounts, but they are none of them 
characteristic ; it is not easy to describe a revolt 
without using the word diroa-rrjffai. in some form, 
while the details are different in the two accounts ; 
the Acts give 4000 men, Jos. gives no number. 
This is recognised by Clemen (SK, 1895, p. 339), 
who is of opinion that the author of the Acts had 
read Jos. but forgotten him. Is this resemblance, 
or fancied resemblance, supported by any other 
passages? Keim and the author of Supernatural 
lieligwn have collected a large number of parallel 
passages, but they are not of a character to bring 
conviction. On the other hand, the argument 01 
Zeller (Eng. tr. i. p. 232) on the discrepancy 
between the Acts and Jos. in the case of the deatn 
of Herod Agrippa is quite sufficient to prove inde- 

Eendence ; and this argument has been very Avell 
rought out by Schiirer. Whatever the dift'erences 
between the Acts and Jos. prove, they are only 
conceivable on the supposition of independence. 
Most of these do not aflect our estimate of the 
historical character of the work ; the difiiculty 
al)out Theudas, even if it admits of no solution, 
may cast doubts on the historical character of 
Gamaliel's speech ; it does not really affect 
the question of tJie Lucan authorship of the 




ix. The Historical Value of the Acts.— 1. A 
priori Objections. — In investigating the historical 
value of the Acts, we must tirst of aU clear the 
ground by putting on one side a number of d priori 
objections. To say that the document is un- 
historical because it narrates miraculous events, or 
because it contains accounts of angels, is simply to 
beg the question. Even if we were quite certain 
that such events were impossible and never 
occurred, we have abundant evidence for kno^ving 
that the early Christians believed in them. St. 
Paul claims himself to have worked what were 
believed both by him and his readers to be miracles 
(Blass, Acta Apostolorum, p. 8f.). Again, all such 
•iiffiqulties as arise from an a priori theory of 
Church history must be banished. To deny docu- 
ments because they conflict with one's theories, is 
to argue in a vicious circle. Although there are 
few serious critics who now accept the Tubingen 
theories, yet many of their assumptions have 
acquired a traditional hold on the minds of ■writers, 
and consciously or unconsciously affect their argu- 
ments. Similarly, objections based on the hier- 
archical or sacramental tendencies of a book assume 
that we can find the beginning of such tendencies 
in the Church ; which we clearly cannot do. 

ilnch the same may be said of the supposed 
parallelisms between St. Peter and St. Paul. 
According to Holtzmann, the strongest argument 
for the critical position is the correspondence 
between the acts of St. Peter and the other 
apostles on the one side, and those of St. Paul on 
the other. Both begin their ministry with the 
healing of a lame man ; both work miracles, the 
one with his shadow, the other with napkins. 
Demons flee in the name of St. Peter and in the 
name of St. Paul. St. Peter meets Simon Magus ; 
St. Paul Elymas and the Ephesian magicians. 
Both raise the dead. Both receive divine honours. 
Both are supported by Pharisees in the council. 
St. Paul is stoned at Lystra, Stephen at Jerusalem. 
St. Paul is made to adopt the language of St. 
Peter, St. Peter of St. Paul, and so on. The 
value of such an argument is one which can only 
depend upon individual feeling. It is, of course, 
perfectly true that they both occupy prominent 

E laces, that they are, in fact, the writers heroes ; 
ut that does not prove the unhistorical character. 
We may well refer to Plutarch's lives. Because the 
^vriter finds parallels between the lives of two men, 
it does not prove that his narrative is fictitious. 
But, further, although there are resemblances, there 
are very considerable diflerences as well, and the 
resemblances arise largely, from the positions in 
which the apostles were placed. There is nothing 
unnatural in the points of similarity, and they are 
balanced by many points of difference. 

Lastly, all arguments against the Lucan author- 
ship, orthe historical character of the work, drawn 
from the fact that the writer clearly has a definite 
plan and purpose, are quite beside the mark. The 
distinction between a history and a chronicle is 
just this, that a history has a plan. The writer, 
from personal knowledge or other sotirces, forms a 
conception of the course of events, and writes his 
history from that point of view. In the present 
case the writer wishes to illustrate and describe 
the steps by which the Christian Church has 
developed. From that point of view he selects his 
materials ; from that point of Wew he describes the 
events and the periods which are to him important ; 
from that point of view he emphasizes the careers 
of St. Stephen, of St. Peter, of St. Paul. His view 
may be right or may be wrong, but because a 
■writer has a ^iew he is not necessarily unhistorical. 
We hope to show that the merit of St. Luke lies 
in having brought out just the point of ■view which 
was important, and that, although there are points 

in which he is perhaps incorrect, substantially his 
histo^ is true and trustworthy. 

2. The Acts and St. PauTs Epistles. — A consider- 
able portion of the narrative of the Acts is con- 
temporary ■with certain of St. Paul's Epistles. 
Here, then, we have some opportunity of controlling 
the narrative, and here we have to meet a very 
curious combination of ar^ments. It is now 
maintained that the Acts is late, and its narrative 
unauthentic because of differences from St. Paul's 
Epistles, and then that these Epistles are its sources. 
To prevent these arguments conflicting, we have to 
suppose a deliberate falsification of the narrative 
of Galatians by the author of the Acts, and an 
extraordinary capacity on his part to conceal his 
obligations. The parallels quoted are very slight, 
but most numerous in the case of the Epistles of 
the captivity. Even here they have little value as 
implying literary obligations ; but if, as we believe, 
St. Luke, the author of the Acts, was St. Paul's 
companion in captivity, and possibly acted as his 
amanuensis, it is natural that his phraseology 
should be influenced by that personal contact. 

There are three passages which demand a more exact com- 

(a) Galli'-«=Ac 9»«o. 
(6) Gal 21-10 =Ac 15l-». 
(e) Gal 2iii = Ac 153*«. 

(a) If we examine the first passages we notice quite definitely 
certain discrepancies. The Acts contain no reference to the visit 
to Arabia ; we should not gather from the narrative that three 
years had elapsed before the visit to Jerusalem ; while the state- 
ment that he was unknown by face to the Churches that were in 
Judxa, is supposed to be inconsistent with the tieX that he 
preached in the synagogues of Jerusalem. But how far do 
these discrepancies take as? It is quite clear that St. Luke 
selects what he requires for his parpoee, and it ia possible that 
he knew of the journey to Arabia and did not ttiink it necessary 
to record it ; nor, again, does he give exact indications of the 
time elapsed, "niere is no necessary inconsistency ; but stall the 
obvious unpression created by the narrative is Uiat the writer 
did not know of the Arabian journey, nor of the length of time 
which had elapsed before Uie Jerusalem visit, and the two 
tuunatives give * somewhat different impression. St. Pan! 
wishes to emi^iasize his independence of the apostles ; St;. Luke 
wishes to show that St. Paul was received by them. But eadi 
hints at the other side. St. Paul clearly implies that be was 
received by them ; St. Luke as clearly, that there was scnne 
hesitation about doing so, and St. Luke's language makes it 
plain that even if he had preached in synagogues in Jerusale m 
he had not preached in Judaea. The aocoonts are different and 
to all appearance independent, they represent different points 
of view, they supplement one another; they are not mcon- 

(6) The same may be said in the main concerning the next 
narrative (Gal 2i-ii'=Ac 151-*'). The very careful examination 
of Lightfoot (Galatiaru, p. 109) represent^ on tiie whole, a very 
fair historical conclusion. Ko sensible person wiD find any dis- 
crepancy if St. Paul, giving his internal motive, states that he 
went by revelation, and St. Luke g:ives the external motive. 
It is quite natural that St. Luke should give the public history, 
St. Paul the private. "What is more important to notice is the 
incidental testimony that e»ch account g^ves to the other. 'We 
gather from St. Paul his g^eat desire to be on good terms 
with the leading apostles — if he is not, he fears he will run in 
vain and ]al>our in vain ; we guther that they receive him in a 
friendly manner — ^they give him the right hand of fellowship ; 
although they are look«i upon by some of their followers as 
being antagonistic to St. Paul, St. Paul does not think so. 
Again, from the Acta we gather that the conclusion was not 
carried out without mu^ dinmte, and ixvsumaUy wa not 
acceptable to all ; and we equally gather, as we would from St. 
Paul, that those who had caused the disturbance had daimed 
that they represented the opinions of the chief apostles. 

It has been assumed that Ac 15 refers to the same event as 
Gal 21-10; but this, although commonly, is not universally 
accepted. Whv, it is asked, does St. Paul omit all reference to 
the %-isit recorded in Ac 11*>? This is a genuine difficultjr. It 
has been suggested that there has been a disarrangement mthe 
Acts, and, owing to a confusion of sources, one of tiie later Tisits 
has been duplicated. The argument against this is that 
Barnabas is represented as the companion of St. Paul, and that 
he had left hnn at a later date. A mistake in chronology is 
probable, but not a mistake as to the ccnnpanionship. On the 
other side, Bamsav (S^ Paul, p. 48) identifies the visit of Gal 
21-10 with that of Ac ll*". He lays great stress on the diflSculty 
involved la supposing that St. Paul omitted all reference to this 
joumev. But file reasons given by Lightfoot — that the apostles 
were not in Jerusalon, and that therefore there was no need for 
the visit to be maitioned— are accepted by Hort (JvdaUtie 
Christianitif, p. 61) as suflBcient. We must refer the reader to 
Bamsay^s own book for the discussion of the subject, but can only 
say that he has not succeeded in convincing ua. A reasonable 




criticism must say th«t the two narratives we are considering 
refer to Uie same events ; ttiat Uie accounts they contain are 
independent and supplementary, but not contradictory (see the 
discussion between Sanday and llomsay in Exporitor, Feo. 1896, 
and foil, numbeni). 

(c) The third point need not detain us long. It is merely 
that St. Luke does not record a narrative concorning St. Peter 
mentioned by St. Paul, lie may have been ignorant of it ; he 
may liave thought that it did not answer his purpose ; he may 
even have thought it better to omit an incident which he felt 
was discreditable. What is important to notice is that the 
narrative in Oalatians proves conclusively that the standpoint 
of the Acts is correct. It was quite Impossible that St. Paul 
could accuse St. Peter of hypocrisy unless he had already 
adopted his view. 'It Is clear from Gal i^^"- thot Peter then 
and tor long before occupied in principle the standpoint of 
Paul ' (Hamaclt, Ilitt. cif Dogma, Eng. tr. vol. i. p. 90). 

An examination of these narratives proves the 
independence of the two accounts, and each 
corroborates the other in various points. When 
we turn to the general narrative in the Acts and 
compare it with that which can be gathered from 
the Epistles, we find three characteristics— inde- 
pendence, broad resemblances, and subtle points of 
contact. All the Epistles which correspond to the 
same period will lit into the narrative, while the 
minute coincidences which have been brought out 
by Paley, whose argument is not out of date, — 
more particularly tliat concerning the collection 
for the saints, — have very substantial evidential 

3. The Archasologiccd Evidence. — A great test of 
the accuracy of the writer in the last twelve 
chapters is given by the evidence from archaeology. 
Its strength and value are so great that we need 
only refer to it. The investigations of the last 
twenty or thirty years have tended more and more 
to confirm the accuracy of the writer. In almost 
every point where we can follow him, even in 
minute details, he is right. He knows that at 
the time when St. Paul visited Cyprus it was 
governed by a proconsul ; this was the case only 
between the years B.C. 22 and some time early 
in tlie 2nd cent. ; then a change was made, 
probably in Hadrian's reign. He knows that the 
magistrates of Philippi were called (rrpaTriyoi, 
and were attended by lictors, but tliat those of 
The.ssaIonica were iroXira.pxa.i. He knows that Derbe 
and Lystra, but not Iconium, are cities of Lycaonia. 
The subject has been worked out in considerable 
detail by Lightfoot and Ramsay, and it is sufficient 
to refer to them. It is enough, too, to refer here 
to the very complete investigations of the account 
of St. Paul's voyage and shipwreck made by James 
Smith (Voyage and Shiptareck of St. Paxil). We 
need not enter into details, as they are admitted. 
What we must emphasize is the bearing of this 
evidence. It proves, in the first place, that in the 
latter portion of the Acts the writer had good and 
accurate sources of information. It is quite im- 
possible that he should be correct in all these 
points unless he had good material, or was himself 
conversant with the events. But it also proves, 
however we think he acquired tlie information, 
that he was accurate in the use of liis sources. It 
is quite inconceivable that a writer who is so 
accurate in a large number of small and difficult 
points could have, as is maintained, used Josephus, 
and used him with incredible inaccuracy. Tliis 
evidence, on the other hand, does not prove that 
the Avriter is nece.'»sarily as tnistwortny in the 
earlier jwrtions of the history, where his sources of 
information were less gootl. It does suggest that 
he would get as accurate information as possible, 
and reproduce it correctly. 

4, We pass backward to the transition period, 
which begins with the preaching of Stephen and 
extends to the end of the apostolic council. This 
is clearly the most important period in the history, 
and we have few means of controlling it. V^e 
have little independent evidence. What we can 

point to, in the first place, is the naturalness of the 
whole history. There were the germs of universal- 
ism in Christianity, but these needed opportunity 
to develop ; and tne whole history shows that the 
expansion arose from the natural reaction of events 
on the Christians, not from any deliberate purpose 
or from any one deiinite event. Take first the per- 
secution. Zeller (Eng. tr. vol. i. p. 229) lays great 
stress on the fact that in the early chapters the 
Sadducees are the persecutors, in the later the 
Pharisees. But this inconsistency is thoroughly 
natural. At first the Sadducees oppose the 
Christians, because, being tlie otticial hierarchy 
responsible to the Romans for the order of the 
country, they fear disturbances ; the Christians 
are merely a sect of devout and zealous Jews in 
favour with the Pharisees. But when once the 
universalist element inherent in Christianity is 
made apparent by the teaching of Stephen, the 
devout and zealous Jews are offended, the Pharisees 
take up the persecution, and it becomes a reality. 
We may notice again incidentally how it is the 
entrance of the freer Hellenic spirit in the per.son of 
Stephen which first brings out this universalistic 
element. The persecution leads quite naturally 
to a dispersion of the Christians, more particularly 
of those associated with Stephen, and consequently 
to the spread of Christianity. In all that follows 
St. Peter takes the lead, a position which is quite 
in accordance with what we know from Galatians 
(see above, § ix. 2). The stages work out gradually 
and naturally, the pressure of faith and enthusiasm 
leads the preachers of Christianity onwards. First 
come the Samaritans, then ' devout men ' who are 
yet not circumcised ; then the preaching to 
Gentiles ; then the growth of a definite Christian 
community in Antioch, i.e. a community which 
the outer world clearly recognised as something 
distinct from Judaism, and which would naturally 
appear first in a place removed from older associa- 
tions ; then the first recorded journey of St. Paul, 
with its unexpected and far-reaching developments, 
and its subtle corroborations in the Romans ( 10'^). 
Naturally enough, there gradually arises a Juda- 
ising party in Jerusalem, and the older apostles 
find themselves acting as mediators between the 
two parties. The position which is ascribed to 
them by the Acts is always recognised by St. Paul, 
and he claims equally to be recognised by them ; 
while both the Acts and St. Paul recognise the 
extreme party as claiming their authority although 
without entire justification (Ac IS-"*, Gal 2'^). 
The whole story as told in the Acts is natural and 
consistent, and gives a piuch more credible account 
of the development of Christianity than any modern 
one constructed on d pHori ideas. 

5. The Early Community in Jerusalem. — The 
first section of the Ac (i^*-5^-) has been often 
treated as the least historical portion of the book. 
It is less true to say that it has been attacked. 
It is rather the case that it has been set on one 
side ('the idealised picture of the Jerusalem com- 
munity,' Holtzmann). And the examination of 
it is difficult, for we have little that is definite 
with which to compare it. The theory, however, 
put forward is tliat this was written from the 
point of view of the author's own time, and from 
tiiat aspect we can examine it. We know how the 
writer of the Clementine reproduces in 
the earliest days of the Church the doctrine and 
the organisation of his own time — he represents 
St. Peter as appointing bishops in every church. 
Now, at any rate, the writer of the Acts lived forty 
years later, and at a time when both the doctrine 
and the organisation of the Church were much 
more developed ; yet we find absolutely no traces 
of tliis either in the speeches or in the narrative of 
the first five chapters. 




To work t Ills out in detail would be beyond the 
scope of the present article, but it may be illus- 
tratetl in some points. The Christology is through- 
out primitive. Our Lord is called 'IijiroCt Xpt<rrdi 6 
Nafdjpcuos (2'-^ 3® 4^"), a name which occurs in the 
Gk>spels, but elsewhere only twice, when St. Paul, 
in the later chapters of the Acts, is referring to his 
earlier life. So again the next phrase that meets 
us is Toti Oiov (S**- * 4*** **), which occurs nowhere 
else in NT of our Lord, and elsewhere is used of 
Him in the Didachi, which clearly represents 
very early tradition. Again, we notice how 
very markedly X/)t<rr6s is not a personal name, rbv 
rpoKex.eipurfUwoi' vfui> Xp. 'Iij<r. (3^), Kvpuw airim koI 
Xpi'crrbj' 6 0ebi Iroltitrev (2*). One more phrase we may 
notice, ApxyrfO' (^^ 5''). "which occurs elsewhere in 
Hebrews twice (2^" 12^), and nowhere else in NT. 
We find nowhere the expression vlbs ffeoO. Whereas 
St. Paul 'placarded' Christ crucified (Gal 3^), 
we find here, as we might expect, that St. Peter 
has to take towards the death of Christ a purely 
defensive attitude (3^). We have no reference to 
Christ's pre-existence. We have, in fact, a re- 
presentation of what must have been, and what 
we have independent evidence to show was the 
earliest Christian teaching about Christ : — the 
proof that He was the Messiah, afforded by His 
resurrection, of which the apostles were witnesses, 
and by the Scriptures. Similar is the relarion to 
the universal character of the Gospel. We are 
told that the Acts was written from a universalist 
point of view, and the statement is quite true in a 
sense ; but we find that St. Peter's speeches are not 
affected by it. God raised up Jesus to give re- 
pentance to Israel (5*^) ; Ye are the sons of the 
prophets and of the covenant (3^). There are 
elements of universalism, but they are incidental. 
The promise is to Israel first (3=®) ; so (2?*) ' to you 
is the promise and to your children, and to all those 
that are afar off' ; 3^ 'in Israel all the families of 
the earth shall be blessed.' The standpoint of 
these chapters is, in fact, that of the Jewish 
prophets. There is the germ from which future 
development can come, but the development is not 
there. One last point we may mention in this 
connexion is the e-schatology. It is thoroughly 
Jewish and primitive, 'that He may send the 
Christ, who hath been appointed for you, even 
Jesus : whom the heavens must receive until the 
times of the restoration of aU things,' 3^^; 
the Messianic kingdom is called the Kotpol dpor 
^v^euis. There is nothing about the personal 
resurrection, which, of course, is a point which 
would not trouble the primitive community in the 
first years of its existence ; and it is diflicnlt to 
understand how a Greek writer who had seen the 
Neronian persecutions, and knew the needs of a 
later generation, could hare invented this primi- 
tive idea of things. 

If we pass to the organisation of the com- 
munity, again, it is quite tmlike the conception 
which we should expect from a Gentile Christian 
of forty or fifty years later. It is perfectly true 
that stress is laid on the unity of the primitive 
community, and it may be that this is exaggerated 
with a purpose ; but no object could be gained by 
the representation which is given of its form 
and character. There is no trace of any later 
organisation, nor mention of presbyters. The 
Christians have, in fact, not yet been cast out of 
the synagogues. They are regular in their worship 
in the temple (Ac 2^, Lk 2-1'^). They take part j 
in the morning and evening sacrifices. They i 
observe the Je^^ish hours of prayer. They join in I 
the synagogue worship (6® 9*). They are not only | 
conforming Jews, they are devout (Ac 21^ 22^-). | 
They do not yet realise that they are separate ; 
from Judaism. ' They are but a sect, the sect of \ 

VOL. I. — 3 

the Xaj'^jpaiot (Ac 24*). One more point may be 
noticed, the community of goods; the exact 
character of this it is unnecessaiy to discuss here. 
It is sufficient to point out that no reason has 
been suggested to explain why it should have so 
much emphasis laid on it, or why it should have 
been invented if it were not historical. 

It has been said that we have little evidence 
for correcting this. The archaeological evidence 
which we found in ch. 13 f. here fails us. But we 
have a few indirect hints. The position of the 
Twelve we may gather from 1 Co 9* 15' ; of St. 
Peter from 1 Co 15', Gal 2^; of St. John from 
Gal 2? ; of the brethren of the Lord from 1 Co 9*. 
A certain amount of incidental evidence is given 
by the Ebionite traditions concerning the position 
of St. James ; and they correspond with what Ls 
suggested by the later parts of the Acts, where 
wehave an account of the state of affairs by one 
who is presumably an eye-witness. 

It is clear that these early chapters give a picture 
of the primitive community which is quite different 
from what existed within the experience of the 
writer, and which is in itself probable. Is it then 
likely that this should be the result of the historirad 
imagination of the writer, or is it not more pro- 
bable that it is historical in character and based on 
written evidence? We have no reason to doubt 
that we possess an historical account of the words 
of the Lord ; and the same witnesses who recorded 
these, either by tradition or in writing, would be 
equally likely to record the speeches and acts of 
the leading apostle of the infant Church. 

6. The Speeches. — One more point under this 
heading demands investigation, namely, the 
speeches Are these genuine records of speeches 
actually delivered, or were they written by the 
historian in accordance with the fashion of the 
day ? We may notice two points, to begin with. 
They are all very short, too short to have been 
delivered as they stand, and for the most part 
the style in which they are written is that of the 
historian. They are clearly, therefore, in a sense 
his own compositions. But the same can also be 
said of a considerable number of the speeches in 
the Gospel. We can compare St. Luke's account 
in this case with that of other authorities, and we 
find, indeed, a slight modification side bv side with 
general accuracy ; we find the style of tne author, 
but the matter of the authority. On the other 
hand, there is no reason for thinking d priori that 
the speeches cannot be historical. As has just 
been pointed out, the speeches of the leading 
apostles would impress themselves on the growing 
communitv, and would be remembered as the 
words of tlie Lord were remembered. 

Putting aside d priori considerations, we must 
as far as possible examine the character of the 
speeches themselves ; and we must first see what 
light St. Paul's Epistles throw on the subject. 
According to 1 Co 15"- the main subjects of 
St. Paul's preaching were the death and resurrec- 
tion of Clirist, as proved by the Scriptures and as 
^\'itnessed to by the apostles, and other incidental 
allusions in the Epistles support this (1 Th 1** 
4"). Now, if we turn to St. Paul's speech at 
Pisidian Antioch addressed to the Jews (13**""), we 
find that the writer has exactly realised what was 
necessary for the situation. The basis is scriptural, 
and the central fact clearly is, the proof of the 
resurrection. Just at the end we have a definitely 
Pauline touch introduced (v.^). This shows that 
the writer clearly grasps the situation as it is 
hinted at by the apostle in his own letters, and 
as was exactly in accordance with the demands 
of the situation ; and this is compatible either with 
his being a writer using a good source, and re- 
producing accurately a speech which he finds in 




that source, or with his being a companion of the 
apostle, who knows the apostle's preaching well, 
and gives a typical speech snowing tne general char- 
acter of his argument. It is very difficult to con- 
ceive of it as a tour de force of historical imagina- 
tion. And this argument becomes stronger when 
it is found that it is applicable to all the speeches 
in the book. We have already touched on those 
of St. Peter, and have seen how clearly they re- 
produce an early stage of doctrinal development. 
Whatever difficulties there may be in the speech 
of Stephen, it certainly does not bear the marks of 
being a rhetorical composition. The speeches of 
St. Paul from first to last are singularly harmoni- 
ous with the situation. The transition in tone 
from that we have already examined to that 
addressed to the lieathen at Iconium or to that at 
Athens, is most marked. When we come to the 
later speeches addressed to the Jews, to Felix, and 
to Agnppa, what we notice at once as very extra- 
ordinary is the repetition of the narrative of the 
conversion. Now that is comprehensible on the 
supposition that the narrative was repeated on two 
occasions, but is not so if we are dealing with 
rhetorical exercises. But St. Luke was, on our 
supposition, with St. Paul during all these events, 
and would therefore have accurate knowledge. 
These speeches then, although -written in the 
author's style, are clearly authentic ; and we may 
argue in the same way about the other speeches, 
all of which are, in ditl'erent ways, suitable to the 
occasion on which they claim to have been delivered. 
The presence of the author's hand in the speeches 
cannot be denied. Their literary form is due to 
him. He may possibly have summed up in a 
typical speech the characteristics of St. Paul's 

S reaching before certain classes of hearers. Some 
etails or illustrations may be due to him, such as 
the mention of Theudas in Gamaliel's speech, or 
that of Judas in Peter's first speech. But no 
theory which does not admit the possession of good 
evidence, and the acquaintance of the author with 
the events and persons that he is describing, is 
consistent with the phenomena of the speeches. 
They are too lifelike, real, varied, and adapted to 
their circumstances to be mere unsubstantial 
rhetorical exercises. 

X. SOURCE.S OF THE ACTS. — Until recently, critics 
seem to have contented themselves witn either 
vague indications of the sources of the Acts, or a 
complete denial of the possibility of discovering 
them, at any rate in the earlier portions (Weiz- 
siicker, Holtzmann, Beyschlag, Pfleiderer, Baur, 
Schwegler). Recently, however, the problem has 
been attacked by a number of scliolars, mostly of 
inferior rank, who do not seem to have attained any 
success, and whose method is not likely to lead to 
any substantial results. Of these, Sorof considers 
that Timothy, the writer of the ' we ' sections, has 
combined a genuine writing by St. Luke and a St. 
Peter source. According to Peine there was an 
original Jerusalem Christian source, which was used 
in the Gospels and extended to ch. 12 of the Acts, 
but which knew nothing of the missionary jour- 
neys of St. Paul. The latter portion is partly due 
to the Redactor (R), partly to other sources. Spitta 
distinguislies an A source, the work of Luke, which 
contains about two-thirds of the Acts, and is 
also used in the Gospel, and a B source of Jewish- 
Christian origin, which runs parallel with the 
first through tne whole of the Acts. Van Manen 
distinguishes a third document, which contained, 
however, only the 'we' sections, and these very 
much edited, a Paul biography, and a Peter bio- 
graphy. Tlie most elaborate theory is that of 
C. Clemen. He distinguishes an ' Urchristliche 
I*redigt,' an * Erste Gemeindegeschicht*,' and 
'Zweite Gemeindegeschichte,' and Historia Helleni- 

starum, which has been worked into an Historia 
Petri ; this was combined with an Historia Pauli 
which included the 'we' sections (Itinerarium 
Pauli) by a R who was free from party bias, 
then came a Judaisin^ R, and then an anti- 
Judaising R, Jungst distinguislies an A source, 
apparently the work of St. Luke ; a B source, the 
work of an anti-Judaiser and a R. It may be 
added, that both Clemen and Jungst consider 
that the original sources have been very much 
rearranged by the different redactors, and the true 
sequence of events destroyed. 

A very few words are necessary concerning these 
theories. The statement of them is really a suffi- 
cient condemnation. There is no harmony in the 
results obtained ; and the method is so d priori 
and unscientific that no result could be obtained. 
The unity of style of the book and its artistic 
completeness make any theory impossible which 
considers that it arose from piecing together bits 
of earlier writings. Somewhat more on right lines 
are the attempts of B. Weiss and Hilgenfeld, in the 
fact that they do not consider that more than one 
source is used in any separate passage. Weiss 
thinks there was one early history which contained 
an account of the early community, of Stephen, of 
Philip, of the journeys of Peter, of the council. 
Hilgenfeld has three sources, A Ac l^'-5''^ 9:;i-43 
12i-=», B Ac 6-8*», C 9'-*' II"-:®; ^nd both pro- 
fess to be able to distinguish what is due to the 
source and what to the .author, the method being 
for the most part absolutely arbitrary. 

A study of St. Luke's Gospel snows us that 
the work is quite certainly a literary whole pro- 
ceeding from one author, that this author made 
use of materials partly written, partly probably 
oral, and that he reproduced them probably largely 
in his own style. If we compare a section from 
this Gospel with the parallel one from St. 
Mark, which clearly represents very nearly the 
original source, we shall find that the difference, 
although one not afTecting the main sense, is 
of a character which would make it quite im- 
possible to arrive at one document from tlie other. 
vVe may notice, again, that although there is a 
certain uniformity of style running through the 
M hole Gospel, yet the character of the source used 
seems to a certain, although undefined, extent to 
have modified it. 

Now, in the Acts there is admittedly a certain 
difference in style between the earlier chapters and 
the later. The later, like the prologue to the 
Gospel and Acts and the ' we ' sections, being 
written in a purer Greek style, the earlier bein^ 
more Aramaic in character. Stated vaguely and 
generally, this is true, although no investigations 
have yet made it definite. The utmost it is at 

E resent safe to assert, is that there appears to 
e a difference in style in the earlier chapters, which 
suggests a written source. 

Starting from the conclusion that the author was 
St. Luke, we must ascribe to him the conception 
of the history as a w hole, and presumably, there- 
fore, all the framework which is part of that 
conception, the object of the author being to mark 
the stages in the progress of Christianity. For the 
whole of the last section, from 20* onwards, the 
author was either an eye-witness or in close con- 
tact with those who were such ; as also in the sec- 
tion IG*"-**, apd here we have the fullest and most 
detailed account. For all the remaining iwrtions 
of St. Paul's journeys he could clearly have access 
to the very best information ; and it is to be noticed 
here that generally, although not invariably, the 
information is perl^ectly accurate, so far as it can 
be tested, but not so full as in the later sections. 
For the stories concerning Philip in the first part 
of the book it is not necessary to go beyond 




personal information ; there is no sign of great 
exactness of knowledge, and the incident recorded 
'2V will explain how that information was ac- 
t|uired. For the earlier history of St. Paul a 
source is not required ; St. Luke had heard the 
story told at least twice, probably much oftener, 
and there is just that vagueness concerning chrono- 
logy which is almost invariably the characteristic 
of information dependent upon oral tradition. Of 
some other sections it is difficult to speak dehnitely. 
For the council the author would be able to 
supplement information gained from St. Paul 
by information gained in Jems. It has been 
lunted that there is probably a written source 
b^ind portions of the first five chapters ; we 
cannot define its limits in these chapters, nor say 
whether or no, as is possible, it included some later 
narratives, such as those of St. Peter (9^^-11^ and 
12^"=^) ; it probably did not include chs. 6-7. No 
investigations have been made which authorise us 
to speak more certainly than this ; but it has 
been suggested (see Blass on 12'^") that these 
chapters had some connexion with St. Mark. It 
is doubtful whether any certain conclusions are 
possible, although a more scientific and more 
comprehensive study of the style of the Gospel and 
Acts may perhaps lead to some result. 

xi. Co>'CLUSlOX. — It now only remains to sum 
up the conclusion of what, o^ving to the variations 
of opinion, has necessarily been a somewhat con- 
troversial article. 

1. The Third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles 
are the work of the same person ; and all tradition 
and argument suggest that the author was St. 
Luke, the companion of St. Paul. 

2. He wrote the Gospel to describe as accurately 
as he coiild the life and preaching of Jesus ; he 
■svrote the Acts to describe the growth and spread 
of the Christian Church. 

3. He had formed a clear idea in his mind of the 
steps and course of this growth, and arranged his 
work so as to bring out these points. The object 
he had in view would influence iiim in the selection 
of his materials and the proportional importance he 
would ascribe to events ; but it would be taking far 
too artificial a view of his work not to allow some 
influence to various less prominent ideas, and even 
to the accidental cause of the existence or non- 
existence of information on different points. The 
extent to which he carried out his purpose would 
be in some measure dependent on nis oppor- 

4. Although he had a definite aim, and con- 
structed a history with an artistic unitv, there is 
no reason for thinking that the history is therefore 
untrustworthv. He narrated events as he believed 
they happened, and he gives a thoroughly consistent 
historv of the period over which it extends. 

5. 'the exact degree of credibility and accuracy 
Me can ascribe to him is dependent on his sources 
of information. From ch. 12 onwards his source 
was excellent ; from ch. 20 onwards he was an eye- 
witness. For the previous period he could not 
in all cases attain the same degree of accuracy, yet 
he was personally acquainted with eye-mtnesses 
throughout, and mav very probably have had one 
or more written documents. In any case, his 
history from the very beginning shows a clear idea 
of historical perspective, and of the stages in the 
growth of the community, even if certain charac- 
teristics of the primitive Church in Jerusalem have 
been exaggerated. 

LiTERATrRE. — (1) The Text. — Besides the general works 
of Tischendorf, Scrivener, and Westcott and Hort, the foUow- 
inpr, among otiber, special works may be mentioned : — J. D. 
Michaelis, Curae in ver. Syr. Actorum Apo»t. 1755 ; F. A. 
Bomemann, Acta Apogt. ad Cod. Cantabrigientitfidemreeentuit, 
1S48 ; Belsheim, IHe Apottetgetehiehte und die Qfenbarung 
Johannii in einer atten lateiniichen ITebertetzung, 1879; S. 

Berger, La Paiimp*e*te de FUury, lw9 ; extr. de la Revue de 
thiol, et philos. ; J. Rendel H&rris, Study t(f Cod. Bezae, Texts 
and Studies, II. i. 1S91 ; P. Corssen, Der Cyprianiteke Text der 
Acta Apott. program of the GjnniiMiain of Scboenbem »t 
Berlin, 1892 ; W. SandaT, Guardian, 18th and 25th May lti02 • 
F. H. Chase, Old Syr. Element in the Text qf Cod. Bezae, 1S93 : 
F. Blass, SK, 1894, p. 86, Uermathena, X3d. p. 121, 1895 ; S. 
Berg«r, Un Aneien texte Latin de» Aete* det ap6tre* retrouve 
dans un MantuerU provenant de Perpignan; Tiri des notice* 
et extraiU, 1895. 

(2) Commentaries. — Chrysostom (o6. 407), Beda (06. 735X 
Calvin (ob. 1564), Grotius (1044), Bengel (1742), Otshausen (1832, 
ed. iv. by Ebrard, 1862X Meyer (1835, ed. vii. by Wendt, 1888, Eag. 
tr. by Gloa^ and DicksonX de Wette (1838, ed. iv. by Overbed 
1S70), Alford (1849, ed. vL 1868X Wordsworth (1857, ed. iv. 1SS7), 
Ewald, I>ie 3 ertten Erangelien und die Apottelgesehiehte (IsTl), 
Cook in the Speaker's Com. (18S1X Nd%en (18S2X Luthardt 
and Zockler in Strack and Zockler's JToin. (1886, ed. iL 1894X 
T. E. Page (18S6X Holtznuum in Hand^omauntar asm Ntuen 
Testament (1892) ; Blass, Acta AposL rite Lueae ad TheophUum 
La>er otter (1895) ; Kendall, AeU of Apostles (1397). 

(3) General Introductions. — S. Davidson (IS4S-61, and again, 
from a different point of view, 1868, ed. iiL 1894), Beuss C&tJOX 
F. Bleck (186*. Eng. tr. 1S69X Ad. HilgenfeW (1875X H. J. 
Holtzmann (1885, ed. iii. 1892X G. Sahnon (1885, ed. vii. 1S94X 
B. Weiss (1886, Eng. tr. 18S8X 

(4) Speciai Treatises on the Acts. — John Lightfoot, Hebrew 
and Talmudieal ExereittUions on the Acts of the Apostles 
(1678) ; Paley, Horae Paulinae (1770, ed. by Birks 1850) ; ZeUer, 
Die ApostelgesehichU (1854, Eng. tr. 1875); J. B. Lightfoot, 
Galatians, 1S65, pp. 81f., 8Sf., 109f., 2761; Supernatural 
Rdigion, \clL iiL (1S77) ; J. B. Lightfoot in Smith's Dm L 25. 

(5) Works on Early Church History. — Neander, Pfiamung 
und Leitung (1832, ed. v. 1862, Eng. tr. 1842, 1846); Baur, 
Paulus (1845) ; Conybeare and Howson. St. Paul, ed. iL (1856) ; 
Rit:schl, Die Entstekung der Attkatho li seken Kirehe (ed. iL 
1857) ; Lechler, Das ApostoHseke und JfaehapostoHsehe Zeitalter 
aS57, ed. iL 1885, E^. tr. 1886); Ewald, Geseh. des Apost. 
ZeitaUers (Eng. tr. History of Ifrael, voL vL); Benan, Les 
Ap6tres, p. X. 0^866X Les EvangUes, p. 435 (1877); Farrar, 
lAfe and Work of St. Paul (1872X Early Days of Christianity 
(18^) ; Lewin, L\fe and EpiitUs ^ St. Paul ^872) ; Weizsacker. 
Das Apostaisehe Zeitalter (1886, 2nd ed. 1892, Eng. tr. 1894); 
Pfleiderer, CTrehristenthuin (1887); Bamsay. The Church in 
the Bom. Empire Q893); Hort, Judaistie Christianity (1894); 
Ramsay, St Paul, the Traveller and the Boman Citizen (1S95X 

(6) Monographs on Special Points. — James Smith, Voyage 
and Shipwreck of St. Paid (1848, ed. iv. 1880) ; J. B. Ughtfoot, 
Essays on 'Supernatural BeHoion,' pp. 291-302, Discoveries 
illustrating the Acts of the Apostles (1889) ; J. Friedrich, Das 
Lukas-Evangelium und die Apostelgesehiehte Werke deuelben 
Verf assert (1890) ; Th. Mommsen una Ad. Hamack, Zur Apos- 
telgesehiehte, xxviiL 16 ; Sitxungsberiehte der konigUek Prfus- 
sisehen Akademie der Wissensehafl zu Berlin, p. 491 (1886). 

(7) The Acts and Jos. (see Ou-1 (Tlemen, Die Chronologic der 
Paulinisehen Briefe, p. 66, n. 53) ; Keim, Gesehiehte Jesu von 
Kazara, iii. pp. 134, 4S0 (1872), and 'Jos. im Neuen Testa- 
ment ' in Aus dem Urchristenthum, L p. 1 (1878) ; Holtzmann, 
Z. fur W. Th. 1873, p. 85, 1877, p. 535 ; Krenkel, t*. 1873, p. 441 ; 
Schiirer, ib. 1876, p. 574 ; The author of ' Supernatural Religion,' 
Fortnightly Beriew, xxii. p. 496, 1877 ; Krenkel, Josephus u. 
Lucas, Leipzig, 1894 ; Bousset in TheoL Litzg. 1895, coL 391. 

(8) Sources.— &orol. Die Entstehung der Apostelgeseh. 1890 ; 
Feine, Eine vorkanon. Cberli^erung des Lukas in Evang. und 
Apostelgeseh. 1891; Spitta, Die Apostelgeseh. ihre Quellen 
und deren gesehiehtHeher Wert (1891) ; van Manen, Paulus I., 
Die HandMinger der Aposteln (1890) ; C. Clemen, Die Chrono- 
logU der Paulinisehen Britfe (1893X and SK (18%. p. 297); 
Johann Jungst, Die Quellen der Apostelgesehiehte (1895); Ad. 
Hilgenfeld, Die Apottdgesehichte rCaek \kren QueOetuekr^ten 
untersueht, Z.fur W. 3*. 1896, pp. 66, 186, 384, 481. 

A. C. Headlam. 
ACUB (B 'Ako6<P, a 'Ako^h), 1 Es 5^. — His sons 
were among the 'temple servants' who returned 
with Zei-ub. Called Bakbuk, Ezr 2«, Neh 7^. 

ACUD ('Ajcoi'5, AV Acua), 1 Es 5».— His sons 
were among the ' temple servants ' who returned 
from captivity with Zerubbabel. Called Akkub 
(2'Pi'= ■ cunning '), Ezr 2*^ ; omitted in Neh 7. 

ADADAH {•n:jis), Jos 15^. — ^A city of Judah in 
the Negeb. The site may be at the ruin 'Ad'adah 
in the desert south-east 01 Beersheba. 

ADAH (Tiy). — 1. One of the two wives of Lamech, 
and mother of Jabal and Jubal (Gn 4}^- ^). The 
name possibly denoted ' brightness ' (cf. Arab. 
ghadM), Cains other wife being named ' ZUlah,' 
or ' Shadow,' ' Darkness.' These names have been 
cited to support the \'iew of the mythological basis 
of the Genesis narrative. But the name may simply 
denote ' adornment ' (Lenormant, Les Origines, p. 
183 f.). According to Jos. (Ant. I. ii. 2) Lamech 



had 77 sons born to liim of Aduh and Zillah. 
2. Daughter of Elon, a Hittite, and one of the wives 
of Esau (Gn SB"-') ; mother of Eliphaz, and ances- 
tress of Edomit« tribes, Tenian, Zepho, Gatam, 
Kenaz, Amalek. In Gn 26" (P) the daughter of 
Elon the Hittite, whom Esau takes to wife, is 
named Basemath. The names in Gn 36 have suffered 
in the process of redaction, and this may account 
for the confusion. Jos. (Ant. ll. i. 2), though 
mentioning Esau's age, and therefore referring to 
(4n 26", gives Adah and Oholibamah {' A\i(idfj.ri) as 
the names of Esau's wives. For a discussion on 
the name, see Baethgen's Beitrdge, p. 149. 

H. E. Ryle. 

ADAIAH (nnj; 'Jehovah has adorned'). — 1. A 
man of Boscath', the maternal grandfather of king 
Josiah, 2 K 22'. 2. A Levite descended from 
Gershom, 1 Ch 6", called Iddo in v.-^^ 3. A 
son of Shimei (in v." Shema) the Benjamite, 
1 Ch 8^". 4. The son of Jeroham, a priest, and 
head of a family in Jerusalem, 1 Ch 9'^. 5. 
The father of Maaseiah, a captain who helped 
Jehoiada to overthrow the usurpation of Athaliah, 
and set Joash on the throne, 2 Ch 23^ 6. One 
of the family of Bani, who took a strange wife 
during the E.xile, Ezr 10'-'. 7. Another of a different 
family of Bani, who had committed the same 
offence, Ezr 1(P. 8. A descendant of Judah by 
Pharez, Neh IP. 9. A Levite of the family of 
Aaron ; probably the same as (4), Neh 1 1". 

R. M. Boyd. 

AD ALIA (N;^^^«, Est 9»), the fifth of the sons of 
Haman, put to death by the Jews. In the LXX 
the name is different, and the MSS vary between 
Bafxri B, BapiX « A, Baped. H. A. WHITE. 

ADAH. — i. Name. — The word nix is originally 
a common noun, denoting either a human being, 
Gn 2* ; or (rarely) a man as opposed to a woman, 
Gn 2-; or mankind collectively, Gn I'*. The 
root ciK is variously explained as (a) make, 
produce, by analogy with the Assyr. addmu 
(Delitzsch, Assyr. Worterbuch ; Oxf. Hcb. Lex.). 
Man, therefore, as adam, is one made or produced, 
a creature, or possibly a maker or producer ; (b) 
to be red, a sense in which the root frequently 
occurs in Heb., e.g. the account of Eclom in 
Gn 25**, and is also found in Arab, and Eth. 
and (?) in Assyr. This etymology would point 
to the term having originated among men of a red 
or ruddy race. Gesenius notes in support of this 
view that the men on Egyp. monuments are con- 
stantly represented as red. Dillmann on Gn 1. 2 
also suggests a connexion with (c) an Eth. root = 
pleasant, well-formed, or {d) an Arab. Toot = to 
attach oneself, and so gregarious, sociable. It has 
also been suggested that adam is a derivative from 
adamah, ground, and describes man as earth-bom, 
yttyfvl)i. The statement of Gn 2^, that man was 
formed from the dust of the adamah, indicates that 
this connexion was in the mind of the writer, but 
it can hardly be the original etymology. It is 
signiiicant that A., as a term for man or man- 
kind, is by no means universal in Sem. languages. 
It occurs in Phoenician and Sabtean, possibly in 
Assyr. (so Sayce, Gram. p. 2, and according to 
HCM, p. 104, 18 the common Bab. word for man ; 
cf. Del. Assyr. Worterbuch). Of course the narne 
A. has l)een adopted by all Sera, translations. It 
is j)08«ible that Edom is a dialectic variety of A. 

11. Adam as Common and Proper Noun. — The first 
man is necessarily the man, and in his case the 
generic term is eouivalent to a proper name. In 
use, adam naturally fluctuates Iwtween a common 
and proper noun. Thus in P's account of the 
Creation, Gn l'-2**, he describes the creation of 
c^^«, mankind, in both sexes; but in his first 
genealogy, Gn 6*"*, cik is used as a proper name. 


J gives an account of the Creation, Fall, etc., of 
D^xn 'the man' (in 3'-'^ DiKi> 'to the man,' should be 
read instead of chk) ' to Adam '), and in 4*" uses ann 
without the article as a proper name. 

iii. The Narratives concerning Adam. — P, in 
Gn p-2^ by itself, simply describes the creation 
of the human species, as of the other species of 
living creatures, and says nothing of any particular 
individuals. But it is only in the case of man that 
the two sexes are specified, and Dillmann main- 
tains that rl2p:^ 121 is not to be taken collectively, 
'male and female,' but as 'a male and a female, 
i.e. the first pair.' Gn 5^'^ Avhich is possibly 
from a different stratum of P, shows that the 
individual Adam, the ancestor of the nations 
mentioned in OT, and especially of Israel, is in 
some way identified with the human species, whoso 
creation is described in Gn 1. This identification 
seems to imply that the human species originally 
consisted of a single pair ; but P does not definitely 
commit himself to this position. Man is created 
last of all things on the same (sixth) day as the 
beasts, but by a separate act of creation and in the 
image of God ; he receives a special blessing, accord- 
ing to which he is given dominion over the earth 
and its inhabitants, and the vegetable creation is 
assigned to him, to provide him with food. While 
it is expressly said of the light, the heavens, earth, 
and seas, the vegetable world, the heavenly bodies, 
the birds, fish, and other animals, that God saw 
that they were good, this is not separately stated 
concerning man, but is left to be inferred from the 
general statement that God saw that everything 
He had made was very good. 

In J, Gn 2**'-428, Avhile the earth is still a life- 
less waste, the man is created out of the dust, and 
Jehovah animates him by breathing into hia 
nostrils. He is set to take care of the garden of 
Eden, and is allowed to eat freely of its fruit, 
except the fruit of ' the tree of the knowledge of 
good and evil.' The animals are created as his com- 
panions and assistants ; but these proving inade- 
quate, the woman Eve is fashioned from his rib as 
he lies in a deep sleep. They live in childlike 
innocence till Eve is tempted by the Serpent, 
and Adam by Eve, to eat of the fruit of the tree 
of knowledge. Whereupon they become conscious 
of sin. Yet they have become like the Elohim, 
and might eat of the tree of life and become 
immortal. Hence they are cursed, and driven out 
of Eden. Man, henceforth, is to win his susten- 
ance with grievous toil from soil which, for his 
sake, has been cursed with barrenness. The only 
later OT reference to Adam is at the head of the 
genealogies in 1 Ch; in Dt 32* and Job 31*^ 
adam is a common noun. 

iv. Significance of the Narratives. — In both 
narratives man is sharply marked off as a created 
being from God the Creator ; and is not connected 
with Him by a chain of inferior gods, demi-gods, 
and heroes, as in the Egyp., Assjt., and Chald. 
dynasties, and in other mythologies. Yet man 
has a certain community of nature w-ith (jod ; he is 
made in His image (P), and receives his life from the 
breath of Jehovah (J). Similarly, man's connexion 
with the animals is implied byliis creation on the 
same day, his separate status by a distinct act of 
creation. He is lord of all things, animate and 
inanimate, the crown of creation (P). So, in J, 
the animals are made for his benefit; and the 
garden, with certain limitations, is at his disposal. 
Woman is also secondary and subordinate to man, 
and the cause of his ruin, but of identical nature. 
The formation of a single woman for the man 
implies monogamy. Man is capable of immediate 
fellowship with God. Sin is not inherent in man, 
but suggested from without; it is at once followed 
by stern punishment, which extends not only to 




the human race, but to animate and inanimate 
nature. Compare E^^: ; and, specially for the Baby • 
Ionian and other parallels to tlie Biblical narrative, 
Cosmogony, Edex. W. H. Bexxett. 

ADAM ix THE XT.— Adam is twice mentioned 
in the NT in a merely historical fashion ; in Jude 
v.", where we read of 'Enoch the seventh from 
A.,' and in Lk 3^, where the genealogy of Jesus is 
traced up to him, and A. himself is ' the son of God.' 
The extension of the genealogy beyond DaA-id or 
Abraham (as in Mt) is no doubt due to the univer- 
salist sympathy of the Pauline evangelist. There 
are two other passages in which reference is made 
to the OT story of the first man, with a view to 
regulating certain questions about the relations of 
men and women, esp. in public worship. The first 
is 1 Co 11^-, the other 1 Ti 2^'-. The use 
made of A. in these passages may strike a modem 
reader as not very conclusive ; it has the form 
rather than the power of what may have suggested 
it — the similar use of part of the OT story hj 
Jesus to establish the true law of marriage (mt 
19*^-, comp. Gn 2^). 

Much more significant than these almost inci- 
dental references is the place occupied bv A- in the 
theology of St. Paul (Ro b^'^-^, 1 Co 'iS^^- «-«). 
The apostle institutes a formal comparison and 
contrast between A. and Christ. 'As in A. all die, 
even so in Christ shall all be made alive.' ' As by 
one man sin entered into the world, and death bv 
sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all 
sinned ' : so, though the sentence is not formally 
completed {Ro o^), righteousness entered into 
the world by one man, and life by righteousness. 
' The first man is of the earth, earthy ; the second 
man is of heaven. . . . And as we have borne the 
image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image 
of the heavenly.' In some sense A. and Christ 
answer to each other ; each is the head of humanity, 
the one to its condemnation and death, the other 
to its justification and life. Yet it would be a 
mistake to put what St. Paul says about A. on a 
footing -with what he says about Christ. He has 
experience to go upon in the case of Christ ; his 
gospel concerning Him has a certainty and scope 
of its own quite independent of the harmony he 
finds in some points between the mode of mans re- 
demption and that of his ruin. Of the two passages 
refened to above, it may be said that the one in 
Ro deals directly with the work of A. and of 
Christ, and its efiects upon men ; the one in 1 Co, 
with the nature of A. and of Christ, as related re- 
spectively to the actual and the ideal condition of 
man. All we are told of A. is that he sinned 
{jrapdr-Tui^a, Ro 5'^ implies the fall), and that his 
sin involved the world in death. In such a state- 
ment there is obviously a link wanting to an ethical 
interpretation : is it supplied in the difficult words 
i<p' ^ irdvT€$ fifujipTov — in that all (have) sinned ? That 
this aorist may (grammatically considered) be a 
collective historical aorist, summing up the aggre- 
gate evil deeds of men, is undoubted (Burton, A. T. 
Moods and Tense-s, § 55) ; but to take it so, and 
make fifmprov refer merely to the personal sins of 
men, is to dissolve the connexion with A. on which 
the apostle's argument depends. To say, again, 
that all men die because involved in the guilt 
of A.'s sin (Gmnes pecca.runt, Adamo peccante, 
Bengel), is still to leave the moral link amissing. 
To say that all die because of inherited depravity, 
which seems the only other possible suggestion, is 
to ofier a physical rather than a moral connexion, 
though one which may be assented to and appro- 
priated by the individual, and in that way become 
moral. It seems probable that St. Paul, although 
he is not explicit on the point, would have 
accepted this view ; what he is concerned with is 

the solidarity or moral unity of the hiunan race, 
and for this there is xindoubtedly a physical 
basis. Heredity is the modem name for the 
organic connexion of the generations ; and as the 
fact was familiar to the apostle, it is natural to 
suppose that he found in it the connecting link 
between the personal sin and doom of A- and Uiat 
of his whole posterity. A., in other words, was to 
him not only the type, but the ancestor, of men as 
sinners ; it is in A. — or because of A. in us — that 
we are lost men. But A. is a * type of him that is 
to come.' This idea (see Weiss, Romans, p. 243 n.) 
is found also in the Rabbins (Qaemadmodum homo 
primus fuit primus in peccato, sic Messias erit 
ultimus ad auferendum peccatom penitns : and 
again, Adamos postremus est Messias). He is a 
type only in the sense that alike from A- and 
Christ a pervasive influence should proceed, ex- 
tending to the whole human race. We are what 
A. was and became, in virtue of our vital relation 
to him ; we are to become what Christ was and 
became, in virtue of a vital relation to Him. This 
is the side of the subject treated in 1 Co 15. It 
can hardly be said to throw light on man's original 
state, or on the apostle's conception of it. The 
first A., in virtue of our connexion with whom we 
are what we are before we become Christians, was 
a living soul, psychical rather than spiritual, made 
of the dust of the ground — in other words, he was 
man as nature presents him to our experience ; the 
last A., 6 erovpdvuK, whose image we shall fully 
bear when this corruptible has put on incomiption, 
and this mortal has put on immortality, was and 
is life-giving spirit. It is too much to sav, in face 
of Ro 5^ and the whole sense of the 5sT, that 
man's mortality is here traced, not to Adam's act, 
but to his nature. His act is not specially in view 
here any more than Christ's redeeming acts, and his 
nature is indeed conceived as weak, and liable to 
temptation; but it is not less capable of immortality 
than of death ; and it is the sin of our first father 
to which death as a doom is invariably referred by 
St. Paul. 

IdTKKATVBX. — Copious discDSsions of aQ ttte questions involved 
may be fonnd (not to mention commentaries) in Beyscfala^, N.T. 
Theoiogy, iL p. 4S ff. ; Bruce, SL Pouts Conception of C/urit- 
tianUjf, c. viL ; Weiss, LekHmeh der. BM. TheoL de* S.T. § 07. 
For Jewish points of connexion 'with St. Paul's teaching, see 
Weber, Die Lehren de* Talmud, oc xv.-xiiL 

J. Dexxev. 

ADAM City (six ' red '). — In the Jordan Valley, 
'far off' from Jericho, and beside Zarethan. The 
latter (see Zarethan) appears to have been near the 
centre of the valley (see Jos 3^®), and the usual site 
for Adam is at the present mined bridge (built in 
the 13th cent. A.D.) at the Damieh ford, called 
Jisr ed-Ddmieh, about half-way up the Jordan 
Valley. The Jordan being narrow, with high 
banks, might have been dammed m) in this vicinity 
by an extensive fall of the cliff. SnP vol. ii. sh. xv. 


ADAM, BOOKS OF. — Romance, with ethical 
intent, accumulated around all the prominent 
worthies of OT narrative, among both Jews and 
Christians ; and, naturally, no one received more 
attention than Adam. This process of embellish- 
ing and 'improving' OT story began before NT 
times. The Talm. speaks of a Bk of Adam, and 
such legendary lore furnished suitable pabulum for 
Mohammedanism. The Apostolic Constitutions 
(vi. 16) mention an apociyphal 'ASdft. Epiphanios 
(HcBT. xxvL 8) tells or a Gnostic work. Revelations 
of Adam, and the Decretum Gelasii prohibits 
Christians from reading the two works, PenUentia 
AdcB and DejUiabus Adce. The Cypriote Syncellns 
(8th cent.) makes quotations from a B<6s *A3d^ 
which closely resemble the Bk of JubUees. The 
Jewish Bk *of Adam is lost ; but it probably 
furnished matter for still further elaboration in the 




following Christian works which still survive. 1. 
The Ethiopic Bk. of Adam, pub. by Dillniann, 
(iiittingen, 1853 ; tr. also by Malan, London, 1882. 
2. A Syr. work, resembling the foregoing, entitled 
The. Trcnsure-Cuve, ed. by Bezold, Leipzig, 1883. 
8. The Sf/rm<^n «ol voXirela 'AW/t* foi EOoj, ed. by 
Tischendorf, Apocalypses ApocryphfE, 1866 ; and 
condensed by Rtinsch, Buch der Jubilden, i)p. 468- 
476. 4. ' Vita Adte et Eva;,' a Lat. rendering of the 
wime material, ed. by W. Meyer in Transactions of 
Munich Academy, \o\. xiv. 1878. 5. The 'Testa- 
nientum Adami,' which has been published by 
Kenan, Syriao text with P'rench tr. in Joum. 
Asiatique, 1853. 6. The sacred book of the Man- 
daites is called the Bk of Adam, but has little in 
common with the foregoing. Edd., Norberg's, 
1815; Petermann's, Berlin, 1867. 

LiTERATiRE.— Fabricius, Codex ptendepigr. Vet. Tett. i. 1-94, 
ii. 1-43; Uort, art. 'Adam' in Smith and Woce, Diet, of Chr. 
liuHi.; Schiirer, HJP II. iii. 81, 147 f.; Zockler, Apocr. dea 
A l'. 422. 3 ; Zunz, Di« gottesd. Vortrdge der Juden, 1892, p. 130. 

J. T. Marshall. 

ADAMAH (ny-jtt), Jos 19^, ' red lands.'— A city 
of Naphtali mentioned next to Chinnereth. Prob- 
ably the ruin 'Adinah on the plateau north of 
Bethshean. See SIVP vol. i. sh. vi. 


ADAMANT is twice (Ezk 3», Zee 7^=*) used in 
AV and RV as tr. of t?;;' shdmtr, which is else- 
where rendered either 'brier' (Is 5« 7a.a4.25 gis iq" 
27'* 32'-') or 'diamond' (Jer 17^). Diamond, which 
arose from adamant by a variety of spelling 
(adamant or adimant, then diamant or diamond), 
has displaced a. as the name of the precious stone, 
a. being now used rhetorically to express extreme 
hardness. See under art. STONES (PRECIOUS). 
'AMixai occurs in LXX at Am V- ^^^ ss tr. of :ij» 
' plummet ' ; this is the origin and meanin" of a. 
in its only occurrence in Apocr., Sir 16'® AV. See 
Plummet. J. Hastings. 

ADAMI-NEKEB (ajj-n 'sifj), Jos \9i^, ' red lands 
the pass.' — A city of Naphtali. It is doubtful if 
the names should not be divided (see Nekeb). The 
site is probably at the present village Ed-DAmieh 
on the plateau north-east of Tabor, where the 
basaltic soil is reddish. The site of Nekeb 
(Seiyddeh) is not far ofl'. See SWP vol. i. sh. vi. 


ADAR (mjj Ezr 6i», Est S^- " 812 91- '""■, 1 Mac 7«- *\ 
2 Mac 15=«, Est 10i» 13« le**).— The 12th month in the 
later Jewish Calendar. See Time. 

ADASA ('ASaffi). — A town near Bethhoron (1 Mac 
/■"'•■'', Jos. Ant. XII. X. 5), now the ruin 'Adaseh 
near Gibeon. SPW vol. iii. sh. xvii. 

ADBEEL (^«3-!N), the third son of Ishmael, Gn 
25'^, 1 Ch 1*, eponym of the N. Arab, tribe, which 
appears in cuneiform inscrip. as Idiba'il or Idifn'al, 
and which had its settlements S.W. of the Dead 
Sea (Saj'ce, HUM 2[)2; Schrader, KAT^ 148; Oxf. 
Heb. Lex. s.v.). J. A. Selbie. 

ADDAN (n?<, 'A^oXo/) A, [Xopa]a^aXa»' B, 1 Es 
5*). — Certain of the inhabitants of this place 
joined the body of the returning exiles in the 
time of Zerubbaliel, but they were unable to 
prove their true Isr. descent by showing to what 
great clan or family they belonged (Ezr 2*"). Prob- 
ably they were not admitted to the privileges of 
full citizenship. The name does not appear m the 
later lists in Ezr 10, Neh 10. Some regard Cherub 
Addan as one name ; v." suggests that Cherub, 
Addan, and Immcr were three nllages in one dis- 
trict in Babylon, from which the family of Nekoda 
came. In Neh 7" the name appears as Addon. 

H. A. White. 

ADDAR, 1 Ch 8».— See Aed. 

ADDAR, AV Adar (tjk), Jos 15'.— A town on 
the border of Judah south of Beersheba. There 
is a ruin east of Gaza which bears the name 'Adar, 
but this seems perhaps too far west. 

C. R. Cokder. 

ADDER.— See Serpent. 

ADD! ('A5dtl).—An ancestor of Jesus Christ, Lk 
328. See Genealogy. 

ADDICT. — ' To a. oneself to,' now used only in 
a bad sense, was formerly neutral, and is found in 
a good sense in 1 Co 16^' ' they have a. them- 
selves to the ministry of the saints' (RV ' they have 
set themselves to minister unto the saints '). Cf. 
Hist. Card. (1670) : ' The greatest part of the day he 
addicts either to study, devotion, or other spiritual 
exercises.' J. Hastings. 

AD DO (A'A55t6, B'ESSe/j/).— The grandfather of the 
prophet Zechariah (1 Es 6'). The name is similarly 
spelt in LXX of Ezr 5^ (A'ASSii, B'ASw). See IDDO. 

ADDON (liiN), Neh 7<". See Addan. 

ADDUS.— 1. ('A55oi5s) 1 Es 5K— His sons were 
among the children of Solomon's servants who 
returned with Zerub. ; the name does not occur in 
the parallel lists in Ezr 2, Neh 7. 2. See Jaddus. 

ADIDA CA8i5d). — A town in the Shephelah (Jos. 
Ant. xiil. vi. 5) fortified by Simon the Hasmonaean 
(1 Mac 12=*8 131^). The same as Hadid. 

ADIEL (Vxnj;?^ 'ornament of God'). — 1. A 
Simeonite prince who attacked the shepherds of 
Gedor, 1 Ch 4»'"r-. 2. A priest, 1 Ch 9'=«. 3. The 
father of Azmaveth, David's treasurer, 1 Ch 27'*. 

ADIN (!'-!« ' luxurious ' ?), Ezr 21' 8«, Neh 7* 10'«, 
1 Es 5^^ 8'=^. The head of a Jewish family, of 
which some members returned with Zerub., and 
with Ezra. 

ADINA (nj'IJL), a Reubenite chief, one of David's 
mighty men, 1 Ch ll^''. 

ADINO {[Kethibh i:ij;.i] 'ji-yn i:nj? 'Adino the 
Eznite,' B 'ASfivwj' 6 'Acrwvaios, A 'ASeiv 6 'Acruvaot). — 
The Kere is clearly an attempt to introduce some 
sense into the meaningless Kethibh. The present 
Heb. text of 2 S 23* must be corrupt, the true reading 
being preserved in the parallel passage 1 Ch 11" 
' Jashooeam, the son of a Hachmonite, he lifted up 
his spear.' The last clause (in':n nx miy Kin) was 
corrupted into i:syn uny xin, and then taken erro- 
neously as a proper name, being treated as an alter- 
native to the preceding ' Josheb-basshebeth, a 
Tahchemonite ' (see Jashobeam). B has the addi- 
tion oOtoj fffirdaaro rijv ^o/j.<palav avrov ; but this is not 
found in A, and is, as Wellhausen has pointed out,- 
derived from the LXX tr. of Ch (cf. 2 S 23i», where 
B renders the same words by i^-fiyetpe rb 86pv avrov). 

J. F. Stennino. 

ADINU (A 'ASii/os, B 'ASeCKio^, AV Adin), 1 Es 5", 
called Adin (A 'Adiv, B 'A5eiv), 1 Es 8»*.— His de- 
scendants returned with Zerubbabel to the number 
of 454 (1 Es 5", Ezr 2") or 655 (Neh 7"-'^). A second 
party of 51 (Ezr 8") or 251 (1 Es 8^^) accompanied 
Ezra. They are mentioned among ' the chiefs of 
the people who joined Neh. in a covenant to 
separate themselves from the heathen (Neh 10^'). 
H. St. J. Thackeray. 

ADITHAIM (c?nii'), Jos 15=*.- A town of Judah 
in the Shephelah. 'The site is unknown. 

C. R. Conder. 




ADJURE. — The primitive meaning of a. (from 
late Lat. adjurarc) is to put under oath. This is 
its meaning in Jos 6-* ' And Joshua adjured them 
at that time, saying, Cursed be the man ' (RV 
' charged them with an oath '), and 1 S 14** ' Saul 
had a^the people, saying, Cursed be the man.' Cf. 
V.** ' thy father straitly charged the people ■with 
an oath.' But the word is also xised in early 
writers in the sense of to charge solemnly, vt-ithout 
the actual administration of an oath. Thus 
Caxton (1483): ' Raguel desired and adjured Thobie 
that he shold abyde with hym.' This is the mean- 
ing of a. in the other places of the Bible where it 
is found 1 1 K 22'«, 2 Ch IS^^, Mt 26«, Mk 6^ Ac 
W% RV gives 'a.' (for AV 'charge,' Heb. Wi?) 
at' Ca 2^ 3* o^- » 8*, and at 1 Th b^ (Gr. eVo/wcifw). 
Adjuration (not in AV) is found in RV at Lv 5- 
(.i^N, AV 'swearing') and Pr 29^ [rh^, AV 
'cursing'). See Oath. J. Hastings. 

ADLAI (-^-i', 'A5ai), the father of Shaphat, one 
of David's herdsmen, 1 Ch 27^. 

ADMAH (.-;^x), 'red lands,' Gn 10" 14»-8, 
Dt 29^, Hos 11*.— One of the cities of the 
Ciccar or ' Round.' It is not noticed as over- 
throwTi in the account of the destruction of Sodom 
and Gomorrah (Gn 19), but is included in their 
catastrophe in the two later passages. The site 
is unknown. It might be the same as the city 
Adam, which see. C. R. Conder. 

ADM ATHA (xr-r-jx, Est 1"), one of the wise men 
or counsellors of Ahasuenis. These seven royal 
advisers (cf. Ezr 7"), who were granted admission 
to the king's presence, and saw his face (cf. 2 K 
25^*), are perhaps to be compared rather with the 
supreme Persian judges (Herod, iii. 31) than with 
the representatives of the six families which took 
part with Darius against the pseudo - Smerdis 
(Herod, iii. 84). The name is possibly Persian, 
arf7n<:i/a = 'unrestrained.' In the LXX only three 
names are given. H, A. White. 

ADMINISTRATION in the general sense of ser- 
vice is now obsolete. But it is found 1 Co 12^ ' there 
are differences of administrations' (i.e. different 
kinds of Christian service, RV 'ministrations,' 
the Rheims XT word). In 2 Co 9^, though the Gr. 
is the same (SiaKovia, sing.), the meaning is not 
service generally, but the performance of service 
(RV again ' ministration ' from Geneva Bible). 

ADMIRE, ADMIRATION.— These' words occur 
in AV as the expression of simple wonder, 
without including approbation. 2 Th 1^* '\S"Tien 
he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to 
be admired (RV ' marvelled at ') in all them 
that believe ' ; Jude v.^® ' having men's persons in 
admiration ' (Gr. ffavfid^om-ei x/»(rwxa, RV ' show- 
ing respect of persons ') ; Rev 17® ' When I saw 
her, I wondered ^vith great a.' (RV ' with a great 
wonder'). Compare the version in metre of Ps 
105' ' Remember his marvellous works that he 
hath done,' is rendered — 

' Think on the works that he hath done, 
^Tiich admiration breed.' 

J. Hasttn'gs. 
ADNA xrM 'pleasure'). — 1. A contemporary of 
Ezra, who married a foreign wife (Ezr lO*'). 2. 
The head of the priestly house of Harim in the 
time of the high priest Joiakim, the son of .Jeshua 
(Neh 1-2-' . H. A. White. 

ADNAH.— 1. (-;-;) A Manassite officer of Saul 
who deserted to David at Ziklag (1 Ch 1220). 2, 
(."!:■;) An otheer in Jehoshaphat's army (2 Ch 17"). 

J. A. Selbie. 

ADO.— Mk 5^9 'Why make ye this ado?' (RV 
• Wh}' make ye a tumult ? '). The older form is at 
do, where ' at ' is the prep, before the infin., foimd 
chiefly in northern £ng. and suppoeed to come 
from the Scandinavian. ' We have other things 
at do,' Toumeley Mysteries, p. 181. 'At do ' was 
contracted into ' ado,' and then looked upon as a 
subst. Cf. Shaks. Tarn, of Shr, V. 1— 

* Lef 8 follow, to see the end of this ado.' 

While throwing it out of Mk 5*, the RV introduces 
' ado ' into Ac 20'* ' Make ye no ado (AV ' Trouble 
not yourselves'), for his life is in him,' though 
the Gr. (dopv^etaOe) is the same in bothplaces. 

J. Hastixgs. 

ADONIBEZEK (pi^ ^jut). — ^The name as it stands 
in Jg 1'"^ must mean, Bezek (an otherwise un- 
known deity) is my lord. The town of Bezek (which 
see) wiU then also have taken its name from that 
of the god. The chief of a Can. kingdom in S. Pal., 
he was defeated by the tribe of Judah, taken 
prisoner, and mutilated by having his thumbs and 
great toes cut off. His boast was that he had 
similarly treated seventy kings. The mutilation 
was intended, while preserving the captive as a 
trophy, to render mm incapable of mischief. 
According to Plutarch {Life of Lys. ), the Athenians 
decreed that every prisoner of war should lose his 
thumbs, so that while fit to row he should be unfit 
to handle spear. Hannibal is accused (Valer. Max. 
ix. 2, ext. 2) of mutilating prisoners, 'primapedum 
parte succisa.' These may be slanders, but they 
prove how conceivable such mutilation was even 
then, and what was its object at all times. 

A. C. Welch. 

ADONIJAH (.Triit).— 1. The name of the fourth 
son of David (2 S 3*, 1 Ch S^). After the death 
of Absalom, Adonijah, who was next in order of 
birth, naturally regarded himself as the heir to 
the throne. His expectation was doubtless shared 
by the nation, and seems to have been for a time 
encouraged by his father. The situation had been 
aJtered, however, by the introduction of Bath- 
sheba into the royal harem, and by the birth of 
Solomon. The influence and the ambition of this 
latest of David's queens rendered it certain that 
Adonijah would encounter a dangerous rival in his 
younger brother. It was probably his knowledge 
that intrigues against his interests were being 
carried on in the harem that led to the premature 
and Ul-starred attempt of Adonijah to seize the 
crown before his father's death. The narrative 
(1 K 1 and 2) is from the same pen as the section 
in 2 S which contains the story of Absalom's 
rebellion, and is evidently the work of one who 
had access to trustworthy sources of information. 
There are several features of resemblance be- 
tween the two nanatives; and the two chief 
actors therein, Absalom and Adonijah, seem 
to have resembled one another in disposition 
and even in bodily characteristics (cf. 1 K l*-* 
with 2 S 14^ 15^). At first Adonijah's enterprise 
seemed likely to be crowned with success. He 
attached to his cause such important and in- 
fluential supporters as Joab the commander-in- 
chief, and Abiathar the priest. In company with 
these and many members of the royal family and 
the king's house, Adonijah held a great feast at 
En-Rogel, where the final arrangements Mere to be 
made for his coronation. But he had reckoned 
without his host. One whom he had not invited 
to the banquet was destined to checkmate the 
conspirators ere their plans were matured. Nathan 
the prophet seems to have occupied much the same 
position at the court of David as Isaiah afterwards 
held at that of Hezekiah. Seeing that not a 
moment was to be lost, Xathan hastened to Bath- 




sheba, whose fears he easily awakened by i)ointing 
out the danger to which her own life and that of 
Solomon would be exirosed if the attempt of 
Adonijah should succeed. IJathsheba, who seems 
to have already obtained from David a promise 
that Solomon should succeed him on the throne, 
immediately sought an interview with the a^ed 
king, and informed him of what was transpirmg 
at En-Rogel ; while Nathan, in accordance with a 
prearranged plan, came in opportunely to confirm 
ner story. 1 he pronhet-counsellor played his part 
with consummate sKill, notably when (1 K 1'-'') he 
expressed surprise that the king, if he had sanc- 
tioned the action of Adonijah, had not taken his 
old friends and counsellors into his confidence. 
Yielding to the representations of the queen and 
the prophet, David renewed his oath to Bathsheba 
in favour of her son, and took prompt measures to 
.secure the accession of the latter. At such a 
juncture the support of the royal bodyguard was 
all-important, and fortunately their loyalty was 
beyond suspicion. Their conmiander was ordered 
by David to escort the youthful Solomon, mounted 
upon his father's mule, to Gihon, and to have him 
anointed king by Zadok the priest and Nathan 
the prophet. This commission was executed 
amidst tiie enthusiasm of the people, who rent the 
air with shouts of ' God save King Solomon ! ' The 
unwonted noise reached the ears of Adonijah's 
guests at En-Kogel, causin^: astonishment, which 
passed into consternation wnen Jonathan the son 
of Abiathar hurried in with the news that David 
had chosen Solomon to succeed him. The com- 
pany broke up in confusion, and Adonijah himself 
was so much alarmed that he fled for protection to 
the altar. Solomon, however, agreed to spare his 
life on condition of future loyalty. If Adonijah 
displayed no consuicuous wisdom in his attempt to 
seize the crown, Iiis next act, which cost him his 
life, is hard to explain, except on the principle, 
Quern Deus milt mrdere prius aementat. After the 
death of his father he actually requested Solomon 
to bestow upon him in marriage Abishag the 
Shunammite, the maiden who had attended upon 
David during his declininjj years. And as advo- 
cate for him in this delicate matter he chose 
Bathsheba ! No one who is acquainted with the 
notions of Eastern courts can wonder at the 
resentment of Solomon, or that he construed this 
re(^uest as an act of treason. Considering the re- 
lation in which Abishag had stood to David, the 
people would certainly infer that Adonijah in 
taking her for his wife still asserted his right to 
the crown. (Compare the story of Abner and 
Ishbosheth in 2 S 3\ and of Absalom in 2 S 16'-^) 
Speedily w^as sentence pronounced, ' Adonijah hath 
spoken this word against his own life ; surely he 
shall be put to death this day'; and the sentence 
was immediately executed by the captain of the 

2. One of the Levites who, according to the 
Chronicler, was sent by Jehoshaphat to teach in 
the cities of Judah (2 Ch 17*). 3. One of the 
'chiefs of the people' who scaled the covenant 
(Neh 10"). Same as Adonikam (Ezr 2^» 8", Neh V^). 

J, A. Selbie. 

ADONIKAM (cij'iTtj 'my Lord has arisen'), Ezr 
2» 8'^ Ntii 7'», I Es r>i« 8» The head of a Jewish 
family iifttr the Exile ; in Neh lO'^ Adonijah. 

H. A. White. 

ADONIRAM, ADORAM (cynr*. d-iik).— The latter 
name occurs 2 S 2U=", I K 12", and is probably a 
corruption of Adoniram. The LXX supports this 
view, reading 'ASuyeipafi, 2 S 20«, 1 K 4« 5" (Heb. 
orjiK). 1 K 12'« (B 'Apafx, A 'ASui>tpa^L), and in the 
parallel 2 Ch W'ASu^ttpan (Heb. c-po, Hadoram). 
A. was 'over the levy,' that is, he superintended 
the lenea employed in the public works during the 

reigns of David, Solomon, and Rehoboam. He was 
stoned to death by the rebellious Isr. when sent to 
them by Rehoboam (1 K 12'^). 

J. F. Stexninq. 

ADONIS. — Strictly not a name but a title, \\i\} 
'AdCn, ' Lord,' of tne god Tammuz (which see). 
Is 17^'' RVm 'plantings of Adonis' (Dry;]ii «i:?j 
nit'i na'amdnim, text 'pleasant plants') and the 
setting of ' vine slips of a stranger ' (strange god), 
is mentioned as the result of having 'forgotten 
the God of thy salvation.' So Ewald, Lagarde, 
Cheyne. With ' plantings of Adonis,' cf. the Gr. 
'Ad(l)vi8oi K^iroi, quick-growing plants reared in pots 
or baskets (Plato, Phcedr. 276 B), and offered to 
Aphrodite as emblems of her lover's beauty and 
early death (Theocr. 15. 113). 

The meaning of na'amunhn is, however, doubtfuL 
Na'aman iaprobably the name of a god ; cf . the name 
of the Syrian general (2 K 5'), and Ar. Numdn, 
a kin^s name (Tebrlzi's scholia to Uamdsn). The 
river Belus is now called Nahr Na'amdn. Lagarde 
(Sem. i. 32) quotes Arab, name of the red anemone, 
ShakaHku-n-Numdn, explaining as ' the wound 
of Adonis ' ; but see Wellhausen, Skizzen, iii. p. 7. 


ADONI-ZEDEK (pi? ';ik ' Lord of righteousness,' 
AV Adoni-zedec), king of Jerusalem at the time 
of the invasion of Canaan by the Israelites under 
Joshua. After the Gibeonites had succeeded in 
making a league with Israel, he induced four 
other kings, those of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, 
and Eglon, to unite with him against the invaders. 
First they attacked, as traitors to the common 
cause, the Gibeonites, who appealed to Joshua for 
help. By a rapid night marcli from Gil^al, Joshua 
came unexpectedly upon the allied kings, and 
utterly routed them [Joshua, Beth-hoiion]. 
Adoni-zedek and his associates sought refuge in a 
cave at Makkedah, but were taken and brought 
before Joshua. The Heb. chiefs set their feet 
upon their necks in token of triumph. They 
were then slain, and their bodies hung up until 
the evening, when they were taken down and flung 
into the cave where they had hid themselves, the 
mouth of which was filled up with great stones 
(Jos IQi--'^). In Jos 10»'- LXX reads 'Adujyi34i;eK, 
and some have identified the latter with Adonibezek 
of Jg P. (See Kittel, Hist, of Heb. i. 307 ; Budde, 
Richt. u. Sam. 63 f. ; W'ellh. Einleit.* [Bleek] 182.) 

R. M. Boyd. 

ADOPTION (vloOeffla) is a word used by St. 
Paul to desiCTiate the privilejje of sonship bestowed 
by God on His people. While Jesus Himself and 
the New Testament writers all speak frequently 
and emphatically of our blessings and duties as sons 
or children of God, no other of them employs this 
special term, which occurs in five places in the 
Epistles of St. Paul (Gal 4», Ro 8»' '-^ 9^, Eph 1»). 
It seems to express a distinct and definite idea 
in that apostle s mind ; and since adoption was, 
in Roman law, a technical terra for an aot that 
had specific legal and social eftects, there is much 
probability that he had some reference to that 
in his use of the word. The Romans maintained 
in a very extreme way the rights of fathers 
over their children as practically despotic ; and 
these did not cease when the sons came of age, or 
had families of their own, but while the father 
lived could only be terminated by certain legal 
proceedings, analogous to those by which slaves 
were sold or redeemed. The same term (manci- 
jmtio) was applied to a process of this kind, whether 
a man parted M'ith his son, or his slave, or his 
goods. Hence a man could not be transferred 
from one family to another, or put into the position 
of a son to any Roman citizen, without a formal 
legal act, whicn was a quasi sale by his natural 
father, and buying out by the person who adopted 




him. If he was not in the power of a natural 
father, but independent (sui juris), as, e.g., if his 
father were dead, then he could only be put in the 
place of son to another by a solemn act of the 
sovereign people assembled in their religious 
capacity {comitia curiata). For each family had 
its own religious rites, and he must be freed by 
public authority from the obligation to fulfil those 
of one, and taken bound to observe those of 
another. That transaction was, however, properly 
called arrogatio, wliile adoptio strictly denotea the 
taking, by one man, of a son of another to be his 
son. This, though not requiring an act of 
legislation, had to be regularly attested by wit- 
nesses ; and in old form one struck a pair of scales 
with a piece of copper as an emolem of the 

{(rimitive process of sale. Adoption, when thus 
egally penormed, put a man in every respect in 
the position of a son by birth of him who had 
adopted him, so that he possessed the same rights 
and owed the same obligations. 

No such legal and complete transference of filial 
rights and duties seems to have exbted in the law 
of Israel ; though there may have been many cases 
of the informal adoption known among us, as when 
Mordecai took the orphan Esther, his uncle's 
daughter, to be his (Est 2"). The failure of heirs 
was pro%'ided for bv the levirate law. 

Now, since St. taul represents the Christian's 
adoption as carrying with it certain definite privi- 
leges which woulH not be involved in such an act 
as Mordecai's, and since he may well have been 
acquainted with the Roman practice in this matter, 
it seems probable that he may have had it in view. 
(See Dr. \V. E. Ball in Contemp. Eev., Aug. 1891). 

The earliest instance of his use of the word is in 
his Epistle to the Galatians, in a passage in which 
several names of human relations are used to illus- 
trate those between God and man. and where the 
apostle expressly says, ' I speak after the manner 
or men ' (3*^), i.e. I use a human analogy to make 
my argument plain. The term that he first 
employs after this remark is that rendered 
covenant, or testament (dia&riicr)), here probably 
in the general sense of disposition, without 
emphasis on the peculiarities either of a covenant 
or of a testament. In virtue of this disposition, 
which was one of promise, given to Abraham and 
his seed, the blessing comes to aU who are united 
to Christ by faith ; for the promise, St. Paul 
argues, was not to the physical descendants of the 
patriarch as a multitude, but to a unity, the one 
Messiah, who was to gather all nations to Himself. 
According to this disposition of Grod, believers are 
sons and heirs (3-'^- ^). But before their faith 
in Christ they were kept in ward tmder the law, 
which was not intended to add a condition to the 
covenant of promise, but to bring their latent sin to a 
head in transgressions (3^*), so that they might not 
seek to be justified by works, but mi^ht accept the 
blessing as of God's free grace through Christ, who 
became a curse for tis that He might redeem us from 
the curse of the law (3'^- ^'-^). This seems to be 
clearly the general line of the argument. But the 
position of men under the law appears to be repre- 
sented by St. Paul in two difierent ways, sometimes 
as bond-servants under the curse (3^*- " 4^- ^), and 
sometimes as children tmder age (4i''). The ex- 
planation of this may be found in the consideration 
that St. Paul never meant to deny that Abraham, 
Da%-id, and other believers in OT times were 
really justified (see Ro 4^"*) ; while as many as 
were' of the works of the law were tmder the curse. 
The former were like children under age, not yet 
enjoying the full privileges of sonship ; the latter 
were like bond-servants. To both alike the 
blessing brotight by Christ in the fulness of the 
time is called adoption (Gal 4'), and this seems to 

indicate that St. Paul holds the sonship, of which 
he is speaking, to be founded on the covenant 
promise of God, and not on the natural relation to 
God of all men as such. We must not therefore lower 
the meaning of adoption, in his mind, to the confer- 
ring of the full pri^dl^ea of sons on those who are 
children by birth. It is, as the whole context shows, 
a position bestowed by a disposition or covenant of 
God, and through a redemption by Christ. This 
probably led St. Paul to the use of the word ; for 
the Roman adoption was effected bv a legal act, 
which involved a quasi buving-out. lie also plainly 
regards it as like the adoption of Roman law in 
tlus, that it gives not merely paternal care, but the 
complete rights of sonship, the gift of the Spirit of 
God s Son, and the inheritance. No doubt this 
legal analo"[y may be pressed too far ; and St. Paul 
plainly indicates that what he means is really 
something far deeper ; for it is founded upon a 
spirittial union to God's Son, which is described 
as ' putting on Christ ' (3^) ; so that our adoption 
is not a mere formal or legal act, though it may be 
compared to such in respect of its authoritative and 
abimng nature. 

Some theologians of different schools (e.g. 
Turretin, Schleiermacher) have inferred from the 
connexion between redemption and adoption, in 
Gal 4', that adoption is the positive part of the 
complete blessing of justification, of which re- 
demption or forgiveness is the negative part. But 
this is a very precarious inference ; and the two 
terms are so difierent in their meaning, that it is 
far more probable that St. Paul meant by adoption 
a blessing distinct from our haN^ing peace with Grod 
and access into His favour, which he describes in 
Ro 5^ as the positive fruits of our jtistification. 
These blessings, indeed, cannot be separated in 
reality ; they are only different aspects of the one 
great gift of life in Christ ; but in order to 
understand clearly the evangelical doctrine of the 
NT, it is necessary to look at them separately. 

The next place where St. Paul speaks about 
adoption is in Ro 8^-^. Here he is speaking of 
the believer's new walk of holiness, and he has 
said, ' If by the spirit ye mortify the deeds of the 
body, ye shall live' (8^). In proof of this he 
asserts that ' as many as are led by the Spirit of 
God are the sons of G<)d ' (8^^) ; and then he proves 
this in turn by saj-ing, ' Ye received not the (or, a) 
spirit of bondage again unto fear, but ye received 
the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, 
Father.' The line of reasoning is the same as in 
Galatians, but put in the inverse order. The pro- 
mise of life is proved by the fact of our being 
sons of God ; and that, again, beeaiLse the spirit that 
He has given us is that of adoption, enabling us to 
address God as our Father, and so (8^*) witnessing 
■with our spirit that we are children of God. In 
this possibly there may be some allusion to the 
witnesses which were necessary to the solemn act 
of adoption according to Roman law and custom. 
Then, as in the earlier Epistle, it is stated that this 
adoption carries with it all the rights of true son- 
ship, ' If children, then heirs,' etc. (8"). St. Paul 
next proceeds to contrast this glorious prospect 
with the present sufferings of the people of God. 
These sufferings are shared by aU creation; and 
the deliverance is to be at the revealing of the sons 
of God (8^), when creation itself shaJl share the 
liberty of the glory of the sons of God (8^^). So in 
8^ he says, ' we wait for our adoption, the 
redemption of our body.' It is the resurrection 
of life at the coming' of the Lord that is xm- 
doubtedly meant; and that is called here the 
adoption^ because it will be the fuU revelation of 
our sonship. Now are we sons of Grod, as St. John 
puts it ; but the world knoweth us not, and it doth 
not yet appear what we shall be ; but when it shall 




tLpfteax, we shall be like Him (1 Jn 3'-'). Another 
Btnking imrallel is to be found in our Lord's words, 
as recortled by St. Luke (2(h*- *"), of those that are 
aceounte<i worthy to attain to the resurrection 
from the dead, ' Neither can they die any more, for 
they are eiiual unto the angels, and are sons of 
God, Ijeinj; stms of the resurrection.' As salvation 
b sometimes sjioken of as a thing perfect here and 
now, and sonietimes a« only to ho completed at the 
last, so St. Paul speaks of adoption. It belongs to 
the believer really and certainly now, but perfectly 
only at the resurrection. 

In Ko y* St. Paul mentions 'the adoption' 
first among the privileges of Israel, which he there 
enumerates. This is in accordance with the fact 
that the nation as a whole is called in the OT 
God's son, and individual members of it His 
children, sons and daughters. The term implies 
further, what is also taught in OT, that they had 
this relation, not through physical descent or 
creation, but by an act of gracious love on God's 
part. And in V-^, St. Paul teaches that not all 
the children of Abraham and Jacob are children 
of Gotl, but they who are of the promise, i.e., 
as he put it liefore, they who accept the promise 
by fait 11. It is not necessary to suppose that St. 
Paul speaks here of another adoption, quite distinct 
from the Christian one ; it is, indeed, an earlier 
and less perfect phase of it, but he regards it as 
essentially the same ; since the gospel was preached 
before to Abraham, and justincation, though 
founded on the actual redemption of Christ, Avas by 
anticipation applied to him and many others 
before Christ came. 

The last place where St. Paul uses the term 
adoption is Eph 1', where he says that God 
eternally foreordained believers unto adoption as 
sons through Jesus Christ unto Himself. This 
refers to the eternal purpose, in accordance with 
which God does all His works in time, and corre- 
sponds to what he had said in Ro 8*, that ' whom 
He foreknew He also foreordained to be conformed 
to the image of His Son, that He might be the first- 
born among many brethren.' The conformity 
here mentioned probably includes moral likeness ; 
but the ultimate end is stated to be that there 
might be many brethren of Christ, among whom 
He is the firstborn. Our Lord, according to St. 
Paul, is, in a peculiar sense, God's Son, His own 
proper Son, begotten before all creation (Col 1"), 
and the grace of adoption makes believers truly His 
brethren and ioint-heirs with Him, though He has 
ever and in all things the pre-eminence as Son of 
God from eternity, by nature and not merely by 

For a fuller account of the Biblical doctrine of 
Divine Sonship, see God, Sons of ; Children of. 

LrrrRATrnE— Comm. on the Pauline Epp. by Calvin, Meyer, 
Alt '. I.i«htfoot, Sanday-Heftdlam ; works on NT 

Til. liniiil, Weiss, Beyschlaff, Bovon ; studies in 

P"' -y by Pnpiderer, Sabfttler, Bruce. (See Ut. 

uniiir t.iU', r?uNs or ; Cuiluken or.) 

J. S. Candlish. 
ADORA {'ASupd) in Idunwa {Ant. Xlll. ix. 1), 
noticed in 1 Mac 13*. The same as Adoraim. 

ADORAIM (cnnti), 2 Ch 11».— A city of Judah 
fortifit'd by Kehoboam on the S.W. of his mountain 
kingdom, now Diim, at the e<lge of the moun- 
taiuH W. of Hebron— a small village. SJVP vol. 
iii. sheet xxi. C. K. CONDER. 

ADORAM.— See Adoniram. 

ADORATIOM.— Under this term may be con- 
veniently considered certain i)ha.<ieH of worship. 
The word itself does not occur either in AV or Rv, 
bat both the disposition of mind and heart, and 

the outward expressions of that disposition, which 
are alike denoted by it, receive abundant illus- 
tration. From one of the actions expressive of A., 
— namely, lifting the hand to the mouth, either in 
order to indicate that the worshipper was dumb in 
the sacred presence, or, more commonly, to kiss it 
and then wave it towards the statue or the god, — 
the term itself is often supposed to be derived 
(admoventes oribus stiis dexteram, Apul. Met. iv. 
28; cf. Pliny, NH xxviii. 5; Min. Felix, Oct. ii.). 
This practice of kissing the hand, accompanied by 
certain other gestures, was, among the Romans, the 
special meaning of adoratio as distinguished from 
oratio or prayer. It was, in antiquity, expressive 
of the deepest respect, and is alluded to in Job 
31=", possibly also in 1 K 19>», Ps 21*, Hos 13=*. 
Adorare is however a compound verb, meaning, 
first, ' to address,' then, ' to entreat, to supplicate,' 
and, finally, * to worship.' That A. should embrace 
at once a range of feelings and a series of acts is 
explained by a very simple consideration. The 
most profound and most intense feelings are just 
those which act or gesture expresses better than 
words. It is only, therefore, to a limited extent 
that A. finds expression in language, and then 
only in language of the most general and least 
objective kind. A. is, in the first place, the 
attitude of the soul which is called forth by the 
loftiest thoughts and realisations of God. Before 
His perfections the soul abases itself ; it seeks to 
get beyond earth and earthly things and to enter 
into His nearer presence. A. belongs thus to the 
mystical side or religion ; it includes the awe and 
reverence with which the soul feels itself on holy 
ground. Its appropriate expressions are therefore 
those which convey the feeling most adequately, 
even though when tried by any objective standard 
they might be pronounced meaningless. We dis- 
tinguish generally between A. and those parts of 
Prayer and Worship which are directed towards a 
special end, — from confession, supplication, thanks- 
giving. Hymns and Prayers of A. set forth the 
majesty, purity, and holiness of God, His ineffable 
perfections, and the soul's loving contemplation of 
them. The adoring heart is ' lost in wonder, love, 
and praise.' In the Psalms, nature in all its 
departments is repeatedly called upon to praise 
and glorify God. St. Paul, caught up even to the 
third heaven, knowing not whether he was in the 
body or apart from the body, and hearing un- 
speakable words, is an example of that self- 
abandonment of devotion which is implied in the 
highest form of A. Possibly a similar meaning 
attaches to the statement of St. John, that he was 
' in the spirit ' on the Lord's day. Not only are 
angels called upon to bless the Lord, but A. is 
represented as the essence of the heavenly life. In 
Is 6 a scene of heavenly A. is depicted ; and 
similar scenes are set forth in the Bk of Rev 
(48-u 58-14 7ii-i2)_ A. is here distinguished from 
service, as something even more truly funda- 
mental, even that from which the only stcceptable 
service springs. 

God is the only legitimate object of A., since in 
Him only perfection dwells, and He only must be 
the supreme object of love and reverence. His 
worship must be spiritual (Jn 4^), and such wor- 
ship accorded to any other is uniformly branded as 
idolatry. Christ is adored because ' God was in 
Him' (2 Co 5'"), and because God 'hath highly 
exalted Him, and is Himself glorified when the 
confession is made that 'Christ is Lord' (Ph 

As regards the attitudes and acts expressive 
of A., these, as already stated, symbolised the 
feeling experienced, and varied therefore with the 
kinds and degrees of emotion indicated. Humility 
was naturally expressed by prostration, kneei- 




•dimply bending head or body ; sub- 
iiJ reverence, by the folded hands and 
Qowiuitst eyes ; wonder and awe, by the uplifted 
hands with palms turned outwards ; invocation 
and supplication, by hands and arms outstretched ; 
dependence and entreaty, by clasped hands or 
meeting palms. Among the Hebrews, standing 
was the more usual attitude in public prayer, as it 
is among the Jews to this day; it indicates, per- 
haps, more a consciousness of the presence of other 
men and less self-abandonment than kneeling (cf. 
the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican), 
which therefore was more appropriate to private 
devotion. Solomon, it is true, knelt at the dedi- 
cation of the temple (1 K 8'^ 2 Ch &% Ezra (Ezr 
9") and Daniel (Dn 6^") likewise fell upon their 
knees ; and St. Paul knelt in prayer A\ith the 
elders of Ephesus. In all these instances, however, 
the idea conveyed is rather that the spectators were 
overlooking or assisting at an act of private 
devotion, than that they were taking part in public 
or common prayer. In one instance (2 S 7^* = 1 Ch 
17^®) we read of sitting as an attitude of prayer ; 
but this probably is a form of kneeling, the 
body being thro^\•n back so as to rest upon 
the heels, as in other cases (1 K 18^-) it was 
thrown forward until the head was placed between 
the knees. To fall at the feet of a person 
(irpoaKvvncns) was an act of extreme reverence, 
generally accompanving supplication (1 S 25-'', 2 K 
4P, Est '83, :Mt 289, kk 5", Lk 8^i, Jn IP-). Pros- 
tration before a human patron or benefactor was 
an Oriental, not a Koman, custom, and hence St. 
Peter declined to receive it from Cornelius, in whom 
it indicated a misapprehension as to the quality of 
the apostle. Of hands lifted to heaven we read in 
Is 1^^, 1 Ti 2*. The consecration of love was 
denoted, as we have seen, by the kiss. Moses and 
Joshua were commanded to remove their sandals 
(Ex 3^, Jos 5^°), because the presence of God made 
holy the grotind on which they stood. In all these 
instances it is easy to discern how the outward act 
expressed, and, in expressing, tended to intensify in 
the heart of the worshipper the feeling with which 
it was associated. A. Stewart. 

ADORNING (mod. adornment) occurs in 1 P 3^ 
' Whose a. let it not be that outward a. of plaiting 
the hair.' The latest use of a. as a subst. is in 
H. More's Seven Ch. (1669): 'Her prankings and 
adomings' {Oxf Diet.). J. Hastings. 

ADRAMMELECH (ti^s^-in).— 1. A. and Anamme- 
lech, the gods of Sepharvaim to whom the colonists, 
brought to Samaria from Sepharvaim, burnt their 
children in the fire (2 K 17^^). Adrammelech has 
been identified with a deity f requentlj' mentioned in 
Assyrian records whose name is written ideographi- 
cally AX. BAR. and AX. xix. IB. This name has 
been conjecturally read 'Adar'; and if this con- 
jecture be right,' Adar ' may be identified Avith 
'Adrammelech' (i.e. 'Adar-prince' or ' Adar- 
Molech '). ' Adar ' is a name of Accadian origin, 
signifying 'Father of decision' {or judgment). 
' Adar ' was active in sending the waters of the 
Deluge. (Cf. Schrader, KAT\ on 2 K l'^'). 

2. (2 K 19^", Is 37^) mentioned with Sharezer as one 
of the muixlerers of Sennacherib. In Is {I.e.) and 
in all the versions of Kings {I.e.) the two murderers 
are described as the sons of Sennacherib, but the 
Kethihh of Kings omits 'his sons.' A Babylonian 
chronicle, referring to the murder, says simply, 
' On the twentieth of the month Tebet, Sen- 
nacherib, king of Assyria, Avas killed by his son 
{sing. ) in an insurrection. ' (See E. Schrader, Keilin- 
schriftlichc Bibliothek, vol. ii. p. 281, and C. H. W. 
Johns in Expository Times, vol. vii. p. 238 f . , and 
p. 360. W. E. Barxes. 

ADRAMYTTIUM (' ASpanvrnov) was an ancient 
city of the country Mysia, in the Kom. province 
Asia, with a harbour, at the top of the gulf Sinus 
Adramyttenus. The population and the name 
were moved some distance inland during the 
Middle Ages to a site which is now called Edremid. 
It must have been a city of great importance Avhen 
Pergamos wffe the capital of the kings of Asia ; 
and hence, when Asia became a Rom. province, 
Adramyttium was selected as the metropolis of 
the N.W. district of Asia, where the assizes 
{conventus) of that whole district were held. 
Its ships made trading voyages along the coasts 
of Asia and as far as Syria (Ac 27^) ; and a 
kind of ointment exported from the city was 
highly esteemed (Pliny, NH xiii. 2. 5). Its 
importance as a trading centre is shown by its 
being one of the cities where cistophori, the great 
commercial coinrge of the east, were struck be- 
tween 133 and 67 B.C. It sutiered greatly during 
the Mithridatic wars, and rather declined in im- 
portance ; but, even as late as the 3rd cent., 
under Caracalla, it still ranked sufficiently high to 
strike alliance coins with Ephesus (implying cer- 
tain reciprocal rights in respect of religious festi- 
vals and games). W. M. Kamsay. 

ADRIA (Ac 27^, RV Sea of Adria).— The sea 
'^amidst' which the ship carrying St. Paul was 
driven during fourteen days, before it stranded on 
Melita. After passing Crete, the voyagers en- 
countered a violent ' north-easter ' (RV Eura- 
quilo), before which they drifted, and running 
under the island of Clauda (RV Cauda, now Gozo), 
they were afraid of being carried towards the 
quicksands (RV Syrtis) dreaded by the mariner 
on the African coast ; but eventually, on the four- 
teenth day, descried land, where they ran the ship 
aground on an island called Melita. The sea which 
they traversed is termed 6 'A5p:as. Three questions 
arise — (1) as to the form, (2) as to the origin, and 
(3) as to the range or connotation, of the word. 

1. WH prefer the aspirated form 'X5pias ; but 
while both forms occur in ancient writers (see the 
variations in Pauly-Wiss. EE s.v.), our choice 
must depend on the probable derivation of the 

2. There were two towns of similar name — Atria 
or Hadria, in Picenum (now Atri), an inland toA^Ti 
having no relation to the Adriatic (except indirectly 
through its port of ^Nlatrinum), and Atria, a town 
of early commercial importance near the mouth of 
the Po, with which the name is associated by such 
authorities as Livy (v. 33), Strabo (v. 1), and Pliny 
{HN iii. 120). This town, still called Adria, is 
described by Livy and others as a Tuscan settle- 
ment, but by Justin (xx. 1. 9) as of Gr. origin ; and its 
early relationswith Greece are (as Mommsen,in OIL 
V. 1. p. 220, points out) yet more certainly attested by 
painted vases of Gr. style found in no small num- 
ber there, but not elsewhere in that district of 
Italy. The Picentine town was in imperial times 
called Hadria, and earlier coins belonging to it 
are inscribed HAT., while in inscriptions from the 
town on the Po the first letter is represented by A, 
not by H, and Mommsen, for that reason, has 
latterly preferred the form Atria. 

3. As Adrias was early used in the sense, to 
which Adriatic has again been confined, of the 
branch of the sea between Italy and lUyria, it was 
not unnatural so to understand it in Ac 27, esp. 
as an island oft' its lUyrian shore, Melita (now 
Meleda), might have been the scene of the ship- 
wreck. Bryant {Diss, on the tvind Euroclydon), 
Macknight, and others adopted this view, which 
some, on their authority, have accepted, although 
Scaliger had pronounced it ridiculous and hardly 
worth refuting. Its chief champion is W. Falconer, 




whose Dissertation on St. PauVs Voyage, published 
in 1817, was reissued in 1870 by the writer's nephew, 
Judge Falconer, with copious additional notes 
controverting (though M'ith little real success) the 
arguments oi Mr. Smith of Jordanhill, in support 
of the tradition wliich regards Malta as the scene 
of shipwreck, and takes Adrias in the wider sense 
of the waters between Crete and Sicily (Voyage 
and Shipwreck of at. Paul, 18i8). The history of 
the strangely varying usage is well indicated by 
Partsch in rauly-Wiss, s.v., and by Miiller in 
his ed. of Strabo, pp. 328, 335, 338. At first the 
name strictly belonged to the inner portion 
a<ljoining the nioutli.-j of the Po and the coast of 
the Veneti, while the lower or south portion was 
known as the Ionian Sea. But these names soon 
became interchangeable, or, if a distinction was 
drawn, it was that of two basins — the inner as far 
as Mount Garganus being more strictly 'the 
Adrias,' the outer the Ionian Sea. Strabo expressly 
recognises this distinction, but indicates that 
Adrias had now become the name for the whole (ii. 
123, vii. 187). But while Adrias comes thus to 
include the Ionian Sea, the latter term in its turn 
obtained an extension to the sea lying between the 
west coasts of Greece and Sicily, which is called by 
Strabo the Sicilian, and was also termed the 
Ausonian Sea (ii. 123), and the name Adrias now 
received a corresjwnding, but even greater, exten- 
sion. A very clear light is thrown on the range or 
connotation of ' the Adrias,' as used in Acts, by 
the statements of Ptolemy, who flourished (not 
• immediately,' as Smith lias said (p. 127), but) 
sixty or seventy years after St. Luke (he Avas alive 
160 A.D.), and who presents an usage which must 
be presumed to have been not only existent, but 
current and generally accepted for some consider- 
able time, in order to find a place in such a work. 
Ptolemy places the Adriatic to the east of Sicily 
(iii. 4), to the south of Achaia (iii. 14), to the west 
and south of the Peloponnesus (iii. 16), and to the 
west of Crete (iii. 15), thus giving to it precisely 
the extent Mhich Strabo assigns to the Sicilian 
Sea. We meet the same wider range in earlier as 
well as later ANTiters. The only argument of 
weight adduced by Judge Falconer m opposition to 
the case thus established, is that elsewhere (iv. 3) 
Ptolemy places Melita (Malta) in the African Sea, 
which bounds Sicily on the south. But it is too 
much to construe this as though Ptolemy 'dis- 
tinctly and unequivocally excluded the island from 
all sea.s but that of Africa. ' The alleged ' exclusion ' 
is a mere inference by Falconer from the ' inclusion'; 
not at all necessary where Melita, lying between 
the two seas called African and Sicilian, might 
easily be associated with either. At any rate, the 
main question concerns not the mere geographical 
assignation of Melita as such, but the meaning to 
be attached to ' the Adrias ' as the sea Avhich the 
vessel traversed on its voyage. And here most 
commentators agree in homing that, in accordance 
with the current usage of the time when St. Luke 
wrote, the word is applied to the whole expanse of 
waters between Crete and Sicily. 

William P. Dickson. 

ADRIEL (S><-ni')._Son of Barzillai, a native of 
Abel-meliolnh in the Jordan Valley, about 10 miles 
S. of Bethshean. He married Merab, the eldest 
daughter of Saul, who should have been given to 
David as the slayer of Goliath (1 S 18>»). Michal 
(2 S 2P) is a mistake for Merab. 

J. F. Sn.XMN.:. 

ADUEL ('ASoi'TjX, Heb. Vkhk, S>t. h-x-^n,, one of 
the ancestors of Tobit, To 1^ A variant form of 
l^sn^,, 1 Ch 4» J. T. Marshall. 

ADULLAM (D^;^), now 'Id-'el-md' 'Feast of 
water,' or Jd-'el-miyeh 'Feast of the hundred' 

(see Clermont-Ganneau and Conder in PEF Mem. 
iii. 361-67; Conder, Tent Work, p. 276 f.; Smith, 
Geogr. p. 229), in the valley of Elah, is frequently 
referred to in the OT. It waa a city of the 
Canaanites (Gn 38'), in the district allotted to 
the tribe of Judah after the conquest (Jos 12''). 
It was fortified by llehoboam (2 Ch IF), and is 
mentioned later on by Micali (1"). After the 
Captivity it was re-peopled by the Jews (Neh 
ll*'), and continued to be a place of im2>ortance 
under the Maccabees (2 Mac 12^). 

The Cave of Adullam, famous through its associa- 
tion with the early history of David, has usually 
been supjposed to have had no connexion with the 
city of that name, and has been located by tradi- 
tion, as well as by many travellers, in the Wady 
Khareitun, about six miles south-east of Bethlehem. 
The most recent authorities, however, are strongly 
of opinion that an entirely suitable site for it 
can be found in the vicinity of the city, and that 
there is no reason for separating the two. Half- 
way between Shochoh and Keilah, and 10 miles 
north-west of Hebron, some caves have been found, 
the position of which suits all we are told about 
David's stronghold, and which are at once central 
and defensible. It may be regarded as practically 
settled that the Cave of Adullam was not far from 
where David had his encounter with Goliath. 

Adullamite ('^V-iy^ 'native of Adullam') is applied 
to Hirah, the friend of Judah (Gn 38'). At the 
time of the conquest Adullam was a royal city, 
and if it was so m Hirah's time, he was probably 
king. W. MuiR. 

ADULTERY.— See Crimes, and Marriage. 

ADUMMIM, The Ascent of (o'piti rih^'.^), Jos 
15' 18'^, forming part of the eastern boundary 
between Judah and Benjamin, is the steep pass in 
which the road ascends from Jericho to Jerusalem. 
Its name, TaVat ed-Dumm, is still the same — ' the 
ascent of blood ' or ' red,' and is most probably due 
to the red marl which is so distinctive a feature of 
the pass. In this pass, notorious for robberies and 
murders, is the traditional 'inn' of Lk lO*', and 
near by the Chastel Eouge or Citeme llouge, built 
by the crusaders for protection of pilgrims from 
Jerusalem to the Jordan. A. Henderson. 

ADVANTAGE. — This is one of our numerous mis- 
spelt Eng. words. It comes fromavan^, ' before,' with 
the suffix age. Hence it has no connexion with 
Lat. prep, ad (though the misspelling is found as 
early as 1523), and the meaning is not simple pi'ofit, 
but superiority. In this sense it is found in 
Ro 3' 'What a. then hath the Jew?' and 2 Co 
2", to which RV adds 2 Co 7=» 12'"- ", in Job 
35', Jude V.18 'a.' should be 'profit.' And so the 
verb • to advantage,' now obsolete, which is found 
in Lk 925, 1 Co 15='- ' what advantageth it me ? ' 
is rightly turned into ' profit ' in RV. 

J. Hastings. 

ADVENT.— See Parousia. 

ADVENTURE, now obs. as a verb, is found Dt 28»« 
' The tender and delicate woman among you which 
would«ota. (intrans.= venture) to set the sole of 
her foot upon the ground for delicateness and 
tenderness'; Jg 9'^ 'For my father fougiit for 
you, and a-* (transit. = risked) his life ' ; Ac l&>^ 
•desiring him that he would not a. himself {doOvcu 
iavrdy, 'give himself) into the theatre.' Cf. 
Shaks. Two G. of Ver. III. i. 120- 

' Leander would adventure it ' ; 

and for the intrans. use Pom. and Jul. V. iii. 11 — 

' I am almost afraid to stand alone 
Here in the churchyard ; yet I will adventure.' 




'At all adventure' occurs Wis 2- 'we are bom 
at all a.' (a&ro<rx.fSiws, KV ' by mere chance') and 
'at all adventures,' Lv 26-' m (np, in the usual 
phrase cy np -"jn). Cf. T. Wilson (1553) : 'which 
showte (shoot) ... at all aventures hittie missie.' 

J. Hastings. 

ADVERSARY. — Besides the general sense of 
opponent, a. occurs with the special meaning of an 
opijonent at law (avriSiKos), Lk 12*^ 'When thou 

foest with thine adversary to the magbtrate'; 
It 5^ Lk 18*. In the foil, passages it is used as 
the tr. of Heb. i?y Sdtdn, Nu 22^, 1 S 2&*, 2 S IS^^, 

1 K 5^ IP^ 23. 25 Cf. 1 P 5« ' your a. (Gr. iyriSixoi) 
' the devil.' See Satak, J. Hastings. 

ADVERTISE, ' to give notice,' ' inform,' Nu 24" 
' I will a. thee what this people shall do to thy 
people in the latter days ' ; and Ru 4'' ' I thought 
to a. thee ' (RY ' disclose it unto thee '). In the 
last passage the Heb. is ' uncover the ear ' (jm nbi). 
See Ear. Advertisement, in the sense of precept, 
admonition, occurs in the heading of Sir 20. 

J. Hastings. 

advice ' in mod. Eng. is to consult with another 
and receive his opinion. But in Jg IJP and 

2 Ch 2o^" 'to take a.' means to consult with 
oneself and give an opinion ; Jg 19^ ' consider of 
it, take a. (RY 'take counsel') and speak.' So 
Shaks. 2 Benri/ VI. II. ii. 67— 

' And that's not suddenly to be perfonn'd ; 
But with advice, and silent secrecy.' 

Advise in the sense, not of giving advice to 
another, but of deliberating with oneself, is found 
twice, 2 S 24'* 'now a. (RY 'advise thee') and 
see what answer I shall return to him that sent 
me,' and 1 Ch 211^ (RY 'consider'). 'Well 
advised' in Pr 13"^, 'but with the well advised is 
wisdom,' means not those who have accepted good 
advice, but those who are cautious or deliberate. 
Cf. Bacon, Essays, ' Let him be . . . advised in 
his answers.' Advisement, now obs., occurs 
1 Ch 12'* 'the lords of the Philistines, upon a. 
(i.e. after deliberation) sent him away' ; 2 Mac 14^ 
'^^^len they had taken long a. thereupon' (RY 
' when these proposals had been long considered '). 

J. Hastings. 
ADVOCATE (xapd/cXip-os), only 1 Jn 2'. See 
Spirit, Holy. 

AEDIAS (B 'Ar?5eias, A -5i-), 1 Es 9=^. — One of 
those who agreed to put away their 'strange' 
wives. The corresponding name in Ezr 10^ is 
Elijah (n;^N, 'HXta). The form in 1 Es is a corrup- 
tion of the Gr. (HAI^ read as AHAIdk), and has no 
Heb. equivalent. H. St. J. Thackeray. 

£NEAS (AtVeas) is the name of a paralytic at 
Lydda who was cured by Peter (Ac 9**-*^). We 
find the name used of a Jew in Jos. Ant. xiv. 
X. 22. A. C. Headlam. 

^NON (kivil'v, 'springs') is mentioned only in 
Jn 3-' as near to Salem (which see). As the 
name 'springs' is common, its locality must be 
fixed by that of Salem. Eusebins and Jerome 
place ^Enon 8 miles south of Scythopolis, now 
Bcisan ; and the name SAlim is said to attach to a 
mound some 6 or 7 miles south of Beisan, while 
three-quarters of a mile south of it are seven springs. 
' Rividets also wind about in all directions. . . . 
I have found few places in Palestine of which one 
could so truly say, " Here is much water"' (Yan de 
Yelde, ii. p. Mo, etc.). The chief difficulty in the 
acceptance of this identification is the naming of 
Salem (Jn 3'-'*) as a well-known town, suggesting 
the well-knov\-n Salim, east of Shechem. Conder 

has pointed out 'Ainfln, bearing the name, situated 
in the Wfidy FSrah. 'Here was once a large 
village, now completely overthrown. A great 
number of rock-cut cisterns are observed on the 
site ' (Survey Memoirs, ii. p. 234). A little to the 
south of 'Ainiin is a succession of springs with flat 
meadows on either side, where great crowds might 
gather by the bank of the copious perennial stream 
shaded by oleanders. Here were ' many waters ' 
(Jn 3^ RYm). It is accessible by roads from 
all quarters, and is situated by one of the main 
roads from Jerus. to Galilee, the road passing 
Jacob's Well (Jn 4®) which our Lord may have 
taken to meet the Baptist in view of threatened 
misunderstandings and jealousies of > his disciples. 
For a full description, see Conder's Tent Work, iL 
pp. 57, 58. The distance is about 7 mUes from 
Salim, which has been made an objection to this 
identification ; but there is no nearer town of 
importance by which to describe its situation. 

A. Henderson. 
iESORA (Mffupd), Jth 4-* (AY Esora). — A 
Samaritan town noticed with Blethhoron, Jericho, 
and Salem (Salim). Possibly 'Asireh, N.E. of 
Shechem (SWP vol. iL sh. xi.). C! R. Conder. 

AFFECT, AFFECTION.— In its Hteral sense of 
'to act upon,' aflect occurs once. La 3^' 'mine eye 
aft'ecteth mine heart.' In Sir 13" the meaning is 
to aspire, 'Aflect not to be made equal unto 
him in talk.' Besides these, observe Gal 4'^- "*, 
where the meaning is to have attection for, be 
fond of. Gal 4" 'They zealously a. vou, but 
not well (Gr. ^TjXovaLv vfids ou koXQs, RV ' They 
zealously seek you in no good way ') ; yea, they 
would exclude you, that ye might a. them' (RV 
'seek them'). Cf. Bingham, Xenoph. 'Alwaies 
soure and cruell, so that Souldiers aflected him as 
children doe their Schoolemaster.' Besides these, 
a. occurs only Ac 14- 'made them evU a*^' (ira/tiw) ; 
2 Mac 4-^ ' not well a«i ' (aXXorptos), RY ' ill a*'*.') ; 
13^ 'well a«^' (ei'/i€i^'s). Affection in old Eng. 
is any bent or disposition of the mind, good 
or bad, as Col 3^ 'set your a. (Gr. ippoveTre, RY 
'set your mind') on things above.' Hence, to tr. 
irddos and the like, some adj. is added, as Col 3^ 
'inordinate a.' (Gr. -rdOos, RY 'passion'); Ro 
P' ' without natural a.' (Gr. doTopyos). But in the 
plu. affiections means passions, as Gal 5^^ ' the flesh 
with the a. (Gr. rddij/ia, RV ' passions ') and lusts ' ; 
Ro 1^ ' God gave them up unto vile a.' (Gr. rdOii 
driiiias, RY ' \-ile passions'). Cf. the diflerence 
between 'passion' and 'passions.' RY gives 'atiec- 
tions' in a good (i.e. the mod.) sense at 2 Co 6^^ 
(AY ' bowels,' which see). Affectioned is found in 
the neutral sense of ' disposed ' in Ro 12"^ ' kindly 
a. (Gr. (piXwrropyoi, RY 'tenderly a.') one to another.' 
Cf. FuUeTjAbel Red. ' He (Luther) was very lovingly 
atiectioned towards his children.' J. Hastings. 

AFFINITY.— In 1 K 3' 'Solomon made a. with 
Pharaoh ' ; 2 Ch IS' ' Jehoshaphat . . . joined a. 
with Ahab ' ; and Ezr 9'* ' Should we . . . join in 
a. with the people of these abominations ? ' a. has 
the special sense of relationship by marriage, being 
distinguished from consanguinity or relationship 
by blood. Cf. Selden, Laws of Eng. (1649), ' Many 
that by a. and consanguinity were become English- 
men.' See Marriage. J. Hastings. 

AFFLICTION is now used only passively ; the 
state of being afllicted, misery. So Ex 3" ' I have 
surely seen the a. of my people,' and elsewhere. 
But it is also in the Bible used actively, as 1 K 
22^ ' feed him Avith bread of a. and -with water of 
a., until I come in peace ' (i.e. bread and water that 
wiU afflict him). Cf. More, ' Let him . . . purge 
the spirit by the a. of the flesh.' J. Hastings. 




AFFRAY.— See Crimes and Punishments. 

AFORE and its compounds.— Afore = before, is 
used OS prep. Is 18* ' aiore the harvest ' ; as adj. 
2 Es 5" ' the night a.' ; and as adv. Ro 1* ' which 
he had promised afore.' Aforehand as adv. = 
beforeliand, in anticipation, occurs Mk 14" ' She is 
come a. to anoint my body' ; and Jth 7^ Afore- 

Eromised is now found 2 Co 9* RV 'your a. 
ounty ' {irpo(irTiyyf>^M-^>'Oi). Aforesaid occurs only 
2 Mac 4*5 14*. Aforetime = formerly, as Dn 6'" 
' (Daniel) prayed ... as he did a.' Aforetime is 
happily introduced by RV at Dt 2"""*', Jos 4^8, 
1 Ch 4^ Jn 9« Ro 3^ Eph 2»-", Col 3^ Tit 3», 
Philem v.", 1 P 3', for various AV expressions, 
generally as tr. of d';?^ or irdre. The a in these 
words is a worn-down form of the old Eng. prep. 
an or on. See A. J. Hastings. 

AFTER, AFTERWARD ('After, orginally a 
compar. of af, Lat. ab, Gr. d»r6, Skr. upa, with 
compar. sufiix -ter, like -ther in " either," etc.=: 
farther oft'.' — Murray) is found in AV and 
RV in all the modem usages as adv., prep., and 
conj., both of place and of time. The only 
examples demanding attention are : 1. some pas- 
sages where after means ' according to,' as in Gn 
1» 'And God said. Let us make man in our ima^e, 
after our likeness ' ; esp. the following (where Gr. 
is Kard), Ro 2' 'after thy hardness and impeni- 
tent heart' ; 1 Co 7* 'after my judgment' ; 2 Co 
11" 'That wliich I speak, I speak it not after the 
Lord ' ; Eph 4r* ' The new man, which after God is 
created in righteousness ' ; 2 P 3^ ' Scoft'ers, 
walking after their own lusts'; Gal 4^ 'he who 
was of the bondwoman was bom after the flesh ' ; 
Tit P 'the acknowledging of the truth which 
is after (RV 'according to') godliness'; and 
He 4" (where Gr. is iv) 'lest any man fall after 
(RVra 'into') the same example of unbelief.' 
2. Where after means ' in proportion to ' : Ps 28* 
' give them after the work oi their hands ' ; Ps 
90" (Pr. Bk.) 'Comfort us again now after tlie 
time that Thou hast plagued us.' So Ps 5P (Pr. 
Bk.). Cf. Litany, ' Deal not with us after our sins,' 
and Wyclif's tr. of Mt 16" ' He schal yelde to 
every man after his works.' 3. Where after is 
used for afterwards, as 1 K 17^' ' Make me thereof 
a little cake first, and bring it unto me, and after 
(RV 'afterward') make for thee and for thy son.' 
SoHoll*, 2P2«. 

Afterward is the older form ; when the AV was 
made, 'afterwards' was coming into use. Skeat 
says he has not been able to find it much earlier 
than Shakespeare's time (but Oxf. Diet, gives one 
1300, and one 1375). AV (Camb. ed. ) has afterward 
66 times, afterwards 13 times. J. Hastings. 

AGABUS ('Aya^oi, of uncerta,in derivation ; 
probably from either ajrr 'a locust,' Ezr 2**, or 
ajv ' to love'), a Christian prophet living at Jeru- 
salem, Ac 11"^-*' 21"»-". Though the prophets 
were not essentially predictors of the future, the 
case of Agabus shows that their functions some- 
times included the actual prediction of coming 
events. At Antioch, a.d. 44, A. foretold a famine 
' over all the world ' in the days of Claudius. Only 
local famines are known in this reign, though some 
were so severe as necessarily to affect indirectly 
the entire emjpire (Suet. Claicd. xviii. ; Tac. Ann. 
xii. 43; Euseb. Chron. Arm., ed. Sch6ne, ii. 252 
et al.). Both Suetonius and Eusebius date a 
famine in the fourth year of Claudius, a.d. 45; 
and since Judnea as well as Greece suflfered, it is 
probably this to which Agabus referred. Joscphus 
speaks of its .severity, and of means taken for its 
relief [Ant. m. xv. 3, XX. il 6 and v. 2). The other 
prophecy of Agabus (A.D. 69) followed the OT 

method of symbolism, and has a close parallel in 
Jn 21". He foretold to St. Paul his imprisonment 
in Jerusalem, but did not thereby divert him from 
the journey. Nothing more is known concerning 
Agabus, though there are traditions that he was 
one of the seventy disciples of Christ, and that he 
suil'ered martyrdom at Antioch. 

R. W. Moss. 
AGAG (33^, Nu 24^ ii^ ' violent (?)' Assyr. agAgu, 
'displeasure'). — A king of the Amalekites, con- 
quered by Saul and, contrary to the divine command, 
saved alive, but put to death by Samuel (1 S 15). 
From the way in which the name is used by Balaam 
(Nu 24^), it seems not to have been the name of any 
one individual prince, but, like Pharaoh among 
the Egyptians, and (possibly) Abimelech among the 
Philistines, a designation or title borne by all the 
kings, — perhaps by the king of that nation which 
stood at the head of the confederacy. Kneucker 
and others, without any reasonable ground, insist 
upon taking it as a personal name, and make its 
use by the writer of Nu 24' a reminiscence of the 
story from Saul's time. J. Macpherson. 

AGAGITE ('J^k). — A term of reproach used to 
designate Haman, the enemy of the Jews at the 
Persian court of Ahasuerus (Est 3^-i» S^-' 9=*). In 
Josephus' version of the story (Ant. Xl. vi. 5), Haman 
is described as 'by birth an Amalekite.' In Est 3^ 
instead of Agagite the LXX reads BoiryaFoi', and 
in 9^* 6 MaKebi^v, while in the other passages 
simply the name Haman occurs. Thus in the 
LXX the word Agagite does not occur. Some 
have argued (e.g. Bertheau in Comni.) that the 
designation was used to indicate to a Hebrew what 
' Macedonian ' would to a Greek, and that it meant 
Amalekite in the sense of a contemptible, hateful 
person, but not as implying that Haman had any 
genealogical connexion with Amalek. The pro- 
motion of a foreigner to such a position in the 
empire as Haman occupied, even under the rename 
of the most despotic monarchs, must have oeen 
quite an exceptional occurrence. Apart from any 
other indication of Haman's foreign extraction, it 
is scarcely safe to base an assumption of such a 
kind on the possible meaning of a mere appellative. 
Others [e.g. v. Orelli in Herzog) think that the 
connexion of this adjective with the proper name 
Agag is extremely doubtful. 

J. Macpherson. 

AGAIN. — The proper meaning of again, 'a 
second time,' is well seen in Rev 19^ ' And a. (Gr. 
Seirrepov, RV 'a second time') they said, Alleluia' ; 
Jn 9^ ' Then a. called they (RV ' so they called a 
second time, Gr. iK deuripov) the man that was blind '; 
Ac IP 'But the voice answered me a. (Gr. ix 
Sfvripov, RV ' a second time ') from heaven ' ; Ph 4** 
' ye sent once and again ' (Gr. 5/s, twice, as in Lk 18^* 
'I fast twice in the week'). But the oldest 
meaning of a. is 'in the opposite direction ' (now 
generally expressed by ' bacK '), and of this there 
are some interesting examples in the Bible : Jg 3'* 
' He himself turned a. (RV ' back ') from the 
quarries'; Lk 10" 'when I come a. (RV 'back 
again ') I ^vill repay thee ' ; Pr 2'* ' None that go 
unto her return a. ; 2 S 22^ '(I) turned not a. 
until I had consumed them'; Lk 6" 'lend, 

hoping for nothing a.' (RV 'never despairing'); 
Gn 24* ' Must I needs bring thy son a. unto the 
land from whence thou camest? ; Mt 11* 'go and 
show John a. (=go back and show John) those 
things which ye do hear' ; Ro 9** AVm 'who art 
thou that answerest again?' Cf. Ps 19« (Pr. Bk.) 
' It (the sun) goeth forth from the uttermost part 
of the heaven, and runneth almost unto the end of 
it a.' ; and 

*Tum again, Whittington, thrice Lord Mayor of London ! ' 

J. Hastings. 




AGAINST. — 1. In its primitive meauiug of 
' opposite to ' against is rarely found alone, usually 
'over a.,' as Dt 1^ 'in the plain over a. the Red 
Sea ' ; but we find Gn 15'" ' and laid each piece 
one a. another' (RV 'each half over a. the other'); 
1 Ch 25=* ' They cast lots, ward a. ward ' ; Ezk 3« 
' I have made thy face strong a. their faces ' ; esp. 
Nu25* 'Take all the heads (RV 'chiefs') of the 
people, and hang them up before the Lord a. the 
Sim' (RV 'unto the Lord before the sun'); 
and 1 S 25** 'David and his men came down 
a. her' (i.e. opposite her, so as to meet her). 

2. From the meaning ' opposite to ' of place, easily 
arises ' opposite to ' of time, of which we have an 
example in Ro 2* 'treasurest up unto thyself 
wTath a. (Gr. er, RV ' in ') the day of wrath ' ; 
1 Mac 5^. Cf. Sjtenser, Prothalamion — 

• Against the Biydale day, which is not long.' 

3. In this sense a. is found as a conjunction 
in three places, Gn 43^ 'they made ready the 
present a. Joseph came at noon '■ ; Ex 7'*, 2 K 16". 

J. Hastixgs. 
AGAR. — The sons of Agar are mentioned (Bar 3^) 
along with the merchants of Midian and Teman, 
as ignorant of the way that leads to the secret 
haunt of WLsdora. Thev are called Hagarenes 
(which see), Ts 83« ; and fiamtes, 1 Ch 5^- =» 27^. 
Their country lay east of Gilead. 

J. T. Marshall. 
AGATE. See Mixer ALS and Precious Stoxes. 

AGE, AGED, OLD AGE.— Respect towards the 
aged as such, apart from any special claims of kin- 
ship, wealth, or public office, has always been a 
characteristic feature in Oriental life. In modem 
Syria and Egypt it has a foremost place among 
social duties, taking rank with the regard paid to 
the neighbour and the guest. Any failure to show 
this respect on the part of the young is severely 
frowned down as unseemly and unnatural. In 
Israel the general custom was strengthened bv 
the command in the law of Moses, ' Thou shaft 
rise up before the hoary head ' (Lv 19*^). This 
beautiful bond between youth and age may be 
described as a threefold cord of wisdom, authority, 
and atiection. 

1. Wisdom. — "Where there is a scarcity of written 
record, personal experience becomes the one book 
of wisdom. As it is put by the Arab, proverb, ' He 
that is older than you by a day is wiser than you 
by a year.' There is a similar emphasis on the 
value of experience when they say, ' Consxilt the 
patient, not the physician.' Hence the diffidence 
and respectful waiting of the youth Elihu, ' Days 
should speak, and multitude ot years should teach 
■R-isdom ■ (Job 32"). Similarly the taunt of Elipbaz, 
' Art thou the first man that was bom ? ' (Job 15^), 
and his claim, ' With us are the grey-headed and 
very aged men' (Job 15^*). Thus also Moses, 
though possessed of the learning of the Egyptians, 
receives helpful advice from Jethro ; and fater on, 
the tragedy of the divided kingdom in the days of 
Rehoboam turns upon the difference of opinion 
between the old and young ad%Tsers of the 

2. Authority. — It was natural that the voice 
of experience and \visdom should also be the voice 
of authority. It was the tide-mark of Jobs pros- 
perity that* the aged rose up before him. From 
the dignity conferred on the father as lord of the 
house and head of the family, the title soon 
passed into one of public office. The old men 
became the ' elders ' of Israel and of the Christian 
Church. Similarly among the Arabs, the family 
of the ruling sheikh (old man) bore the title of 
sheikhs from their youth — an extension of the 
orig. meaning that is seen also in the corresp. 

ecclesiastical term. When the Lord sought to set 
forth the hij'h meaning of discipleship with regard 
to enmity, slander, immorality, and murder. He at 
once reached a point that seemed beyond the ideal 
when He alluded to the law revered by age and 
authority, and declared that even it must be 
\-italised and transfigured (Mt 5""®). 

3. Mutual Affection. — The teaching of the Bible 
on age appeals as much to the heart as to the 
head, and many affectionate interests are made to 
cluster around the relationship of old and young. 
In the language of endearment, ' the beauty of old 
men is the grey head ' (Pr 20^), and ' The hoary 
head is a cfowna of glory' (Pr 16^). The presence 
of the aged in a community is r^arded as a sign of 
peace and goodwill, just as the rarity of old age 
and of natural death indicates a state of blood-feud 
and party strife (Job 22^*). John, who in youth 
came to Christ with a petition of selfishness, lives 
to say in his old age, ' Greater joy have I none than 
this, to hear of my children walking in the truth ' 
(3 Jn y.''). The women of Bethlehem in their 
rejoicing over the child of Boaz and Ruth, bring 
the expression of their joy to her who would feel it 
most, and say, ' There is a son bom to Xaomi ' (Ru 
4^'). In the same spirit the aged apostle, in his 
appeal to Philemon on behalf of Onesimus, gives a 
predominance to love over law, saying, 'I rather 
beseech, being such an one as Paul the aged' (Philem 
V.*). The last and softest fold of this affectionate 
relationship is the feebleness of age, and its claim 
upon the protection of the strong. It was the 
absence of this that made Moses stand apart and 
unique. Barzillai is too old for new friendships 
and fresh surrovmdings. The limit is set at three- 
score and ten, and excess of that is increase of 
sorrow. Jacob's retrospect is over days ' few and 
evil.' There are days in which there is no pleasure. 
Along with the recognition of long life as a mark 
of divine favour, the apostle can say, ' To die is 
gain.' Lastly, when heart and flesh fail, the 
prayer is made to the Almighty, ' When I am old, 
forsake me not' (Ps 71^*). 

Along with this devotion to the old and reverence 
for the past, the Bible keej^ a large space for the 
fact of reaction against routine, and the superseding 
of the provincial and preparatory. Elihu occupies it 
when he says with the intensity of epigram, ' There 
is a spirit m man, and the breath of the Almighty 
giveth them understanding. It is not the great 
that are wise, nor the aged that understand 

i'udgment ' (Job 32^"*). Cf. ' A new commandment 
give unto you' (Jn 13**). The old existed for 
the young, not the young for the old. As the 
\\-isdom of the man of years grew into the teach- 
ing of the historical past, it was discovered that 
the new was really the old, and that the latest 
bom might be the most mature. The very rever- 
ence for the M-isdom of the past set the limitation 
to its authority. The well-worn garment had to 
be protected against the loud predominance of the 
new patch. The old bottles were once new. Hence 
along with the exhortation to seek the ' old paths ' 
we have the announcement that 'old things are 
passed awav.' Further, in the Via Dolorosa of the 
centuries along which the Word of Grod walked 
with the questioning and sorrows of men, as the 
light forced the darkness into self-consciousness, 
and the kingdom of God came nearer, it could not 
but happen that the august form would sometimes 
appear to block the way, and dispute the passage 
ot the truth for which 'it existed. The appeal to 
the Burning Bush is always for some newer name 
than the God of the fathers. Hence in the course 
of revelation, as the purpose of di\-ine grace grows 
luminous, the infinite spirit chafes against the 
limited form, and a distaste is provoked towards 
r^imental wisdom and macadamized morality. 




The refreshment of the brook makes men think of 
the fountainhead. Hence in Israel the akedia of 
Ecclesiastes on account of the omnipresent past ; 
and in heathenism the inscription of religious 
despair, 'To the unknown god,' and the unrest 
that urged philosophy to 'some new thing' (Ac 

The Bible witnesses throughout to this vital 
relationship between the new and the old ; for its 
last scene is a repetition of the first— the new 
creature stcjiping mto the new heavens and new 
earth, and in the eternal service behind the veil 
new notes are heard in the song of Moses and the 
Lamb. As long as the power of vision remains 
limited, it is essential to the sublime that some- 
thing of blue haze and boundlessness should lie 
on the horizon both of life and landscape. 

G. M, Mackie. 

AGEE (n;x). — The father of Shammah, one of 
' the Tiiree ' ^2 S 23"). We should prob. read ' the 
Hararito ' here in conformity with v.*^ and 1 Ch 
11", the Jonathan of v.*^ (as emended) being the 
grandson of Agee. Wellhausen, however, prefers 
the reading 'Shage' (1 Ch ll*^) to 'Shammah' of 
2 S 23^, and would restore 'Shage' here for 
• Agee ' ; on this view, Jonathan (v.*^) would be the 
brother of Shammah. J. F. Stenning. 

AGGABA (A B »»""«• 'Arya^d, B om., AVGraba), 
1 Es fi^.—ln Ezr 2« Hagabali, Neh 1^ Hagaba. 
The source of the AV form is doubtful. 

AGGAEUS (AV Aggeas), 1 Es 6i 7^ 2 Es 1« for 
Haggai (which see). 

A6IA (*A7t(i, AV Hagla), 1 Es 5=».— In Ezr 2" 
Neh T®* Hattil. 

AGONE.— 1 S 30" 'Three days agone I fell sick.' 
This is the earlier form of the past part, of the 
verb agan or agon, ' to pass by,' or ' go on.' Only 
the part, is found after 1300, and after Caxton^ 
day this longer form gradually gave place to ago. 
Chaucer (Troilus, ii. 410) says — 

' Of this world the feyth is all agon.' 

J. Hastinss. 
AGONY. — In the sense of great trouble or 
distress, agony is used in 2 Mac 3'* 'There was 
no small a. throughout the whole city ' (cf. 3i«- ^i). 
In Canonical Scripture the word is found only in 
I.k 22*» of our Lord's Agony in the Garden. And 
there it seems to have been introduced by Wyclif 
directly from the Vulg. agonia, just as the Lat. of 
the Vulg. was a transliteration of the Gr. iyuvLa 
(on which see Field, Otium Norv. iii., ad loc). 
Tindale (1534), Cranmer (1539), the Geneva (1557), 
the Rheims (1582), the AV (1611), and the RV 
(1881) all have 'an agony' here; Wyclif himself 
has simply ' agony.' J. Hastings. 

AGREE TO.— In the sense of 'assent to,' with a 
person as object, a. is found in Ac 5*' 'To him 
they a.' ^Teio-^ijiroj' ain-Q. In Mk W it is used in 
the obsolete sense of ' agree with ' or ' correspond 
with,' 'Thou art a Galilrean, and thy speech 
agreeth thereto' (A^otdfet, TR; RV following edd. 
omits the clause). J. Hastings. 

AGRICULTURE. — Agriculture, which in its 
wider sense embraces horticulture, forestry, and the 
pastoral industry, is here restricted to the art of 
arable farming — including not only ploughing, 
hoeing, etc., but reaping and threshing. As the 
savage phase has been followed by the pastoral, so 
the pastoral has been followed by the A*", in the 
history of the progressive peoples. The first 
important advance upon the primitive stage took 

the form of the domestication of M'ild animals, and 
this, by bringing man into closer and more 
deliberate contact with the soil, contained the 
promise of further progress. The domestication of 
wild plants naturally succeeded, and the neolithic 
man is known, not only to have reared cattle, 
goats, and swine, but to have cultivated wheat, 
barley, and millet, which he ground with mill- 
stones and converted into bread or pap. 
While the Aryans were still virtually in the 

Sastoral stage, the A*' art was being actively 
eveloped in Egypt and Assyria. In the NUe 
Valley nature bountifully paved the way. The 
inundations of the Nile create an admirable bed 
for the seed by reducing the irrigated soil to 
a 'smooth black paste,' and the monuments 
exhibit the people as improving from the earliest 
times their great natural advantages. The 
early traditions of the Hebrews, on the other 
hand, were essentially nomadic. The association 
of Cain with A. (Gn 4) implies a disparagement 
of the calling. Abraham is represented as a pure 
nomad. And although, as is indicated in the 
histories of Isaac (Gn 26'-) and Jacob, the be- 
ginnings of A. would naturally have a place in the 
primitive period, it is only after the conquest of 
Can. that the Jews take rank as an A*' people ; 
and even then the tribes of the trans-Jordanic 
plateau, whose territory was unsuitable for tillage, 
continued to depend on cattle-rearing. 

The agrarian legislation of the Pent, in reference 
to the settlement of Can. doubtless embodies some 
ancient laws and customs regulating the tenure 
of the soil, although other enactments must be 
regarded as of later origin, or even as the 
unfulfilled aspirations of the exilic age. To the 
last class prooably belong the institution of the 
sabbatical year (Ex 23", Lv 25^), the produce of 
which, or its ' volunteer ' crop, was reserved for the 
poor, the stranger, and cattle ; and that of the year 
of jubilee (Lv 25-"), in which the dispossessed heir 
resumed possession of his ancestral acres. Among 
the enactments of a greater antiquity and validity 
may be mentioned the law against the removal of 
landmarks (Dt 19"), which was made urgent by 
the fact that the arable lands, unlike the vine- 
yards, were not divided by hedges (Is 5'). 

The climate of Pal., owing to the removal of 
forests, must now be much less humid than in early 
times. The summer is rainless and warm, the 
winter and early spring are rainy and colder. 
During tlie dry season the heat, esp. in the low 
country, is excessive, and rapidly burns up all 
minor vegetation ; while any surface-water, as 
from springs, is evident in the spots of unwonted 
verdure which it induces on the parched landscai>e. 
In autumn the cisterns are nearly empty, and the 
ground has become very hard. The husbandman 
must consequently wait for the rains before he can 
start ploughing. The rainy season begins about 
the end of Oct. , and is divided into three periods — 
early rains (n-iio), which prepare the land for the 
reception of the seed, heavy winter rains (cya), 
saturating the ground and tilling the cisterns, and 
late rains (rip^j), falling in spring and giving the 
crops the necessary moisture. Snow is often seen 
on the higher lands in winter, and hail is not 
infrequent. The coldest month is February, the 
warmest August. 

The soil of Pal. varies widely in texture and 
appearance. In the higher regions it is formed 
mostly from cretaceous limestone or decomposing 
basalt rocks; in the maritime plain and the Jordan 
Valley there are more recent formations. Like 
the sedentary soils, where of sufficient depth, the 
alluvial deposits are naturally fertile ; and under 
the intensive and careful cultivation of ancient 
times the fertility was proverbial (cf. Ex 3^- '", 




Jer 11», Tacitus, Hist. lib. v. c. 6). The lessened 
productiveness of modern times is due in part to 
the diminislied rainfall, but mainly to political and 
social changes. The high farming of antiquity 
took several forms. Low walls, built along 
hill-slopes to prevent ' soil- washing,' gave rise to 
flat terraces. Various methods of irrigation were 
practised (Gn 2i», Pr 2V, Is 30* 32- ■^'). Canals 
conveyed the water from the natural sources to the 
fields, or water-wheels might be used. 

Other A*" improvements were the removal of 
stones from the fields, and the utilisation of the 
ash residue of stubble and weeds. Ordinary dung, 
made in dunghills by treading in straw (Is 25^*), 
was also in common use (2 K 9*^). A bare fallow 
would be occasionally allowed to raise the tempo- 
rary fertility of the soil. 

Ihe number of Crqps under cultivation was 
large. The most important was wheat (.T?n). 
The supply exceeded the requirements of the 
country, and it was possible to export it in con- 
siderable quantities (Ezk 27"). Second in im- 
portance was barley (T-jj-j'), which was extensively 
used as food (Ru 3"), esp. by the poorer classes. 
Spelt (ntrr) was frequently grown on the borders of 
fields. Millet (--t), beans (7i2), and lentils (cj^x) 
were cultivated and used as food (Ezk 4^, 2 S 17^). 
Flax (."T-f?) was grown (Ex O'V. and probably also 
cotton (^S"^?). 

Among the statutory regulations relating to the 
crops, the most noteworthy are : — the prohibition 
against sowing a field with mixed seed iLv 19"), a 
regulation impl\-in^ considerable botanical know- 
ledge ; the provision for damages in case of 
pasturing a l^ast in a neighbour's field (Ex 22^) ; 
permission to the wayfarer to pluck from the 
standing com enough to satisfy hunger (Dt 23*) ; 
reser\-ation for the stranger and the poor of the 
comers of the field (Lv 19^i, and other provisions 
dictated by humanity (Dt 24i»). 

The A. of Pal. has not advanced or changed in 
any import^int particular since OT times. In 
consequence we can, apart from Biblical notices, 
largely reconstruct the A'' picture of the past from 
the Syrian conditions of to-day. An additional 
source of information has of recent years been 
opened up in the Egyp. hieroglyphics, and esp. in 
the representations of A** operations found in the 
Egyp. tombs ; and in order the better to bind 
together this material, we shall now follow the 
process of cultivation of one of the common cereal 
crops from seed-time to harvest, giving some account 
of the implements employed and of the dangers 
incident to the growing crops. The year of the 
agriculturist was well tilled up — from the middle 
of Oct. to the middle of Apr. with ploughing, 
sowing, harrowing, weeding ; from the middle of 
Apr. onward with reaping, carrying, threshing, and 
storing the grain. The interval between threshing 
and sowing was occupied with the vineyard pro- 
duce. It appears that the seetl was sometimes 
sown without any previous cxxltivation, and after- 
wards ploughed in or otherwise covered, while at 
other times the seed was scattered on ploughed 
land, and covered by a rude harrow or by cross- 
plougliing. The former method was common in 
Egypt, where the grain, deposited on moist ground, 
might be covered by dragging bushes over it, and 
afterwards trotlden down by domestic animals (cf. 
Is 32-'"). Wliere cultivation preceded sowing, 
various implements were used. From the Egyp. 
monuments it is possible to trace the evolution of 
the Plough — the starting-point being a forked 
branch used as a hoe, which was afterwards 
improved into a kind of mattock, and finally was 
enlarged and modified so as to be drawn by oxen. 
The plough was drawn by two oxen, and the 
draught was sometimes from the shoulders, some- 

VOL. I. — 4 

times from the forehead, or even from the homs. 
In some cases men with hoes may have pulverised 


(1) EI-Kabosah, grasped in working by the left hand ; (S) el-akar, 
the handle or stilt ; (3) el-bonik, the beam ; (4) el-nateh, a 
support, secured by a wedge ; (5) el-eawajir, the conplings ; 
(6) el-woslah, the pole ; (7) d-dkkah, the ploughshare. 

the surface aft«r the plough, as in Egypt. (See 
Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, 2nd series, vol. L 
woodcut 422.) The old Heb. plough was of very 
simple construction, consisting of a wooden ground- 
work (1 K 19^*) with iron wearing parts (Is 2*, cf. 
1 S 13*'). It had one stilt to guide it ,Lk 9"), leaving 
the other hand free to use the ox-goad (t?^). 


The plough was drawn by oxen, i.e. the ox -kind, 
for the Jews did not mutilat* their animals (Am 
6"), or by asses (Is 3(P*), but not by an ox and ass 
together (Dt 22^"*). On thin soil a mattock was 
sometimes necessary (1 S 13*). The unit of square 
measure was the area ploughed in a day by a yoke 
of oxen (T~i). 

The season of Sowing was not one of joy (Ps 
126';, owing to the uncertainty of the weather fMic 
6'', Pr 2»>';, and the toUsomeness of the work in 
a hard and rocky soil. A start was made with the 
pulse crops, barley followed a fortnight later, and 
wheat after another month. Usually the sower 
scattered the seed broad($ist out of a ba-sket, but 
by careful farmers the wheat was placed in the 
furrows in rows (Is 2S'''). The summer or spring 
grain was sown between the end of Jan. and the 
end of Feb. In a season of excessive drought the 
late-sown seed rotted under the clods (Jl 1^ ; in 
a wet season the early-sown grain grew rank and 
lodged, and the husbandman was accordingly 
counselled to make sure of a crop by attending to 
both tEc 11«). 

Between sowing and reaping, the crops were 
exposed to several dangers. Of these the chief 
were tlie easterly winds prevalent in Mar. and 
Apr. (Gn 41*'', hailstorms (Hag 2"), the irrap- 
tion of weeds — esp. mustard, thistles, tares, 
and thoms (Jer 12"), the depredations of crows 
and sparrows (Mt 13*), of fungoid diseases, esp. 
mildew (Dt 28^), and of injurious insects, esp. the 
palmer-worm, the canker-worm, the caterpillar, 
and the locust. These names do not, as has been 
suggested, refer to the different stages in the life 
history of the locust [Pachytylus miftratoriiis), but 
the first three are probably specific names for 
groups of pests. The crops 'were also in danger 
from the inroads of cattle (Ex 22^), and as harvest 
approached, from fire (Jg 15*). 

The commencement of Harvest naturally varied, 
not only with the season, but according to 
elevation, exposure, etc. On the average it began 
with barley (2 S 21') — in the neighlx)urhood of 
Jericho about the middle of Apr., in the coast 
plains ten days later, and in the high-lying 
districts as much as a month later. Wheat was 
a fortnight later in ripening, and the barley and 




wheat harvest lasted about seven weeks (Dt 16*). 
The harvcHt was tJie occa«ion of feHtivities which 
in the later legislation were brought into close 
connexion with the religious history of tin; ]icoiilf. 
The crops were cut, ns in Egypt, with the sickle. 
(See "Wilkinson, op. cit. woodcuts 426 and 43(5.) 

Little value was nut upon the Straw, which was 
cut al)out a foot below tiio ears (.lob 24'-'*). The 
reajMjr left the grain in handfuls beiiind him (Jer 
9**), and the binder tied it into sheaves (Gn 37'), 
which, however, were not set up as shocks. The 
Egyptians usually cut the straw quite close under 
the ears, while some crops, such as dhurah, were 
simply plucked up by the roots. The nietliod of 


{lulling the com was i)robably also practised in 
'al. when the crops were liglit (Is 17'). In. OT 
there are apparently two kinds of Sickle referred 
to— »5-in and Vp. The wooden sickle, toothed with 

floor, and, according to one system, cattle — four or 
five harnessed together — were driven round and 
round, until ;i more or less comjilete detachment 
of the grain v ;is ( Ificted (Hos lO'M. To facilitate 
tlie process, the straw was re[ieatedly turned over 
by a fork Avith two or more j)rongs. A well-known 
Iiicture gives a representation of this Bvstem as 
anciently practised in Egyjit, noteworthy being 
the fact that the oxen are unmuzzled (cf. Dt 25*). 

The group further shows how the oxen were 
yoked togetner that they might Avalk round more 
regularly. (See Wilkinson, o/j. n7.) Of the thresh- 
ing-niacnine two kinds were, and still are, employed 
in Palestine. 


One (j^iD or pin) consisted of an oblong board, 
wiiose under side was rough with notches, nails, and 
sharp stone chips, and which, being weighted down 


flints, supiMJsed by Prof. Flinders Petrie to be an 
imitation of the jawlx>ne of an ox, Avas used in 
Syria as well as in Egypt. 

The rea[jer8 were the owners and their families, 
along with hired labourers (Mt O**), the latter of 
whom prol)ably followed the harvest from the 
plains to the mountains. The workeis uucnchcd 
their thirst from vessels taken t( > st- field 

(Ru 2''*), and ate bread steeped in -*), and 

E arched corn (Lv 23"), the latter piepared by 
eing roasted and then rubbed in the hand. 
The Threshing usiially took place in the fields, 
a custom made possi hie by tlio rainless weatlier of 
harvest. The Threshing-floor (pj) consisted of a 
round open space, probably of a permanent 
character, and preferably on an eminence where it 
•was exposed to the free sweep of air current-s. Eor 
brinpng in the sheaves, carts wt-re cmi)loyed in 
old times (Am 2'^). Threshing was jHiriormed in 
various ways. Small quantities of prmluce, also 
l»ulse-crops and cummin, were beaten out with a 
stick (Ru 2"). In dealing with large quantities 
of grain, the sheaves were spread out over the 

by stones and by the driver, not only shelled out 
the com, but lacerated the straw (Is 41''', Job 41*'). 


The other kind of machine was the threshing- 
waggon, n^3;;(Is28-'- =*), now seldom seen in Pal., but 




still common in Egypt. It consisted of a low-built, 
four-cornered waggon frame, inside which were 
attached two or three parallel revolving cylinders 
or rollers. Each of the rollers was armed with 
three or four sharpened iron discs. There was a 
seat for the driver, and it was drawn by oxen 
yoked to a pole. 

After the threshing came the work of Winnowing 
(Job 21'«, Ps 35'). The niLxture left by the 
previous operation, consisting of com, chaff, and 
broken straw, was turned about and shaken with 
a wooden fork ^Is 30^^), and advantage was taken 
of the winds to separate the ^ain from the lighter 
material. This often necessitated night work, as 
the winds usually blew from late in the afternoon 
till before sunrise. 


At the later stage of the winnowing process the 
fork was less needed than the fan ('"ntc], a kind of 
shovel ; or the grain might be scooped up, as 
shown in some Eg}-p. representations, by two 
pieces of wood. The chaff, after being separated, 
was burned (Mt 3'-;, or left to be scattered by the 
winds (Ps 1*). From the heavier impurities the 
com was cleansed by sieves ("H?;) — an operation 
specially necessary in view of the mode of 
threshing, after which it was collected into large 
heaps. To prevent thieving, the owner might 
sleep by the threshing-floor (Ru 3") untU the 
removal of the grain, on waggons or otherwise, to 
the barns or granaries (Lk 12'^i. It was often 
stored in pits (Jer 41*), the openings of which 
were carefully covered up to protect them from 
robbers and vermin. The straw remaining 
from the threshing was used for cattle fodder 
(Is 65-«). 

LiTERATTRB. — On the general subject : SennngeT, Hebraitdu 
Archceoloffie ; Stade, Geseh. d. VoOc* Isr. Bd. L Buch riL; 
licmdvcirthteh. Jahrtmcher; Novrack, Lehrbueh der Archaeologie ; 
Thomson, Land and Book; Fellows, Aria Minor; Zeittehrtft 
des Deutsehen Paldttina-Vereins, Bd. ix., 'Ackerbau und 
Thierzucht'; Indexed Quart. Statement* and other pabb. of the 
PaL Explor. Soc. On Egyp. Agriculture : Wilkinson, Manner* 
and Cuitomg of the Ancient Egyptians (2nd Series^ On the 
Plough : Schumacher, ' Der arabische Pflug,' In Bd. xiL o( 
above-named ^rtf«:Ari/if. On the Threshing-machine : Wetzstein, 
'Die syc. Dreschtafel,' in Rastian's ZeiUch.j. Ethnologie (1873), 
272 ff. 

J. W. Patebsox. 
AGRIPPA.— See Herod. 

AGUE.— See Medicixe. 

AGUR (T3K ; LXX paraphrases arbitrarily ; 
V\ilg. congregans). — Mentioned only in Pr 30*. 
The name of an otherwise unkno^\Ti Heb. sa^e, son 
of Jakeh. The word has been understood from 
very early times as a pseiidonym, used symboli- 
cally. So Jerome, follo^ving the Rabbis of his 
time. In this case it might be interpreted as akin 
to the Syriac dgiiro = ' hireling ' (of wisdom), or 
derived from Heb. "ux, and understood as ' col- 

lector' (of proverbs). Cf. form rip; in Ps 91*, Pr 
6*. The description of Agur in Pr 30^ is not 
easy to understand. "With the Massoretic point- 
ing, the verse may be literally rendered, 'The 
words of Agur, son of Jakeh, the prophecy : the 
oracle of the man to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal.' 
This sounds impossible. The conjunction of the 
words massa ( = prophecy) and ne'uTn (= oracle) Ls 
unprecedented ; the use of the article with massa 
is inexplicable ; and the words which follow have 
no prophetic character. Consequently Massa has 
been understood as the name of a country (so 
Del. ; and see RVm Jakeh of Massa) ; cL Gn 
25". Similarly, Lemuel would be understood to 
be king of Massa, Pr 31^ Cheyne (Job and 
Solomon) and Strack (Kurzgef. Komm.) render 
massa as 'prophecy.' Both the country and the 
age of this unknown philosopher are purely con- 
jectural. He may have been one of the 'men of 
Hezekiah,' Pr 25^ His name is probably to be 
associated, as compiler rather than author, with 
the gnomic utterances in Pr 30^-31*; 31^» 
forming a separate section. The chief mono- 
graph on the subject is Miihlau, De Prov. Aguri 
et Le,m. origine (1869), and a full discussion of the 
subject is to be found in Delitzsch's Comni. 
in loco. W. T. Davison. 

AH, AHA. — 1. ' Ah ' is used to express grief (esp. 
in face of coming doom), except in Ps 35^ 'Ah 
(RV 'Aha'), so would we have it,' where it 
expresses the exultation of an enemy, and Mk 
15=^ 'Ah (RV 'Ha!'), thou that destroyest the 
temple,' where it expresses mocking. The RV 
has introduced ' Ah ! ' into Lk 4^ for ' Let ns 
alone ' of AV (Gr. 'Ea, which may be either the 
imperat. of the verb edw to let alone or an inde- 
pendent interjection, formed from the soimd). Aha 
(a combination of a, the oldest form of ' ah,' and 
ha) expresses malicious satisfaction, except in Is 
44'*, where it denotes intense satisfaction, but 
without malice, ' Aha, I am warm ; I feel the 
fire.' J. Hastings. 

AHAB (SKnx, 'Axcui^, Assyr. A-ha-ab-bu) signifies 
' fathers brother.' (Cf. analogous uses of the same 
element ::« 'brother' in Syr. proper names.) The 
meaning of the compound is probably 'one who 
closely resembles his father.' The father in this 
case was Omri, the founder of the dynasty, and 
from him the son inherited the military traditions 
and prowess which characterised his reign. A. 
married Jezebel ('>;,">)» daughter of Ethbaal, kin^ 
of Tvre (the Ithobalos, priest of Astarte mentioned 
bv ilenander, quoted by Jos. c. Apion, L 18). 
This was part of the policy of close alliance with 
Phoenicia, begun by Solomon, and cemented by 
OmrL This bond of union was designated by 
Amos (P) a 'covenant of brethren.' It was un- 
doubtedly founded on reciprocal commercial in- 
terest which subsisted for centuries, the com, oil, 
and other agricultural products of Canaan being 
exchanged tor other commercial products of the 
great mercantile ports of Phoenicia (cf. Ac 12*). 

Whatever commercial advantages might accrue, 
Israel's national religion was destined to suffer. 
A temple and altar to Baal were erected in Samaria 
as well as an Asherah-pole. To supersede Israel's 
national deity, J", by the Tyrian Baal, seemed an 
easy task. To a superficial observer the difference 
between the worship of Ephraim and that of 
Samaria might appear trifling. Both Baal and J" 
were worshipped with similar sacrificial accompani- 
ments. Moreover, northern Israel had for centuries 
been exposed to all the influences which their more 
highly civilised Can. neighbours had introduced 
( Jg 2^ "), and even the very name Baal, ' Lord,' 
was current in their speech as an appellation of J' 




(Hos2"-^*). Yet there was one deep distinction 
which marked off the J" of Mosaism from the Biial 
of the Canaanites. The k li-ioii of Mosaism was 
pvire of sensual taint. Tlic con i unction of Asherah 
with .1 in t h.' days of Josiah (2 K '23^) was a corrupt 
jji.H iir((liH' to toreign innovation. So also were 
the dfliusiiig accompaniments of worsiiip referred 
to in Am 2'. And the licentious cult of Jiaal and 
Ashtoreth, establishe*! by the influence of A.'s 
Phoen. wife, would nitiiinly liave its temple 
attendants, probably In lian knir.shim and Kede- 
shGth. These features' of worship, however, had 
become perilously familiar to N. Israel, owing to 
their close contact with Can. neighbours. Accord- 
ingly, as we can readilj infer from the language 
of Elijah in 1 K 19, national feeling was not deepTj 
or permanently roused even by the influence of nis 
stirring personality and by the occurrence of a 
prolonged drought of more than two years' dura- 
tion (1 K 17' 18'), which, according to Menander of 
Ephesus, extended to Phoenicia.t In all pro- 
bability, the military despotism wielded by the 
house of Omri, in alliance with a powerful northern 
State, was able to subdue any smouldering embers 
of discontent. But an act of cruel injustice 
iiwiikcnt'd till' (lonii.iiif s]iiiit of the people. Like 
UKiiiy Oiii'iitul luoiiiinli.-^, A. displayed a taste 
for architecture, whith Tyrian influence stimulated 
and fostered. He built a palace for himself, 
ndornod with woodwork (probably cedar) and 
inl.iid ivory, in Jezreel (I K 21' 2;2^^). To this he 
desired to attach a suitable domain, and for the 
purpose endeavoured to acquire, by jjurchase or 
exchange, the vineyard of one of the wealthier 
inhabitants, Naboth. But Naboth was unwilling 
to part with an ancestral inheritance. What A. 
could not accomplish by legal means, he was in- 
duced by the promptings of Jezebel to compass by 
fraud and judicial murder. This act aroused 
popular hatred, and the sense of outraged social 
order found expression in the denunciation of doom 
pronounced by Elijah (1 K 21'^"-*) against the king 
and his iinscrupulons queen (see Naboth and 
Elijah). The incident is instructive to the 
student of Heb. religion, as it illustrates the con- 
trast in the attitude of Phoen. as compared with 
Heb. religion towards social morality. In the 
words of W. R. Smith, 'the religion of J" put 
iiiornlity on a far sounder basis than any other 
i(li;^iim did, l>ecause the righteousness of J" as 
a God who enforced the known laws of morality 
was conceived as absolute ' {Prophets of Isr. 73). 
It is more than doubtful whether A. really com- 

1»rehended the religious issues. lie regarded 
ilijah as a mischievous fanatic, 'a troubler of 
Israel ' bent on wrecking the imperial schemes of 
aggrandisement based on alliance with Phoenicia at 
the expense of Syria. Elijah, like many another 
since nis day, earned the title of unpatriotic, 
because he placed righteousness nnd religion before 
the exigencies of political stat( i r,i it . 

The military career of A. cxiiiliits him as a 
warrior of considi prowess. Respecting his 
wars with Syria A\r have only the brief record in 
1 K 20-22. In IK 20 we are plunged in medias 
res. Saniaiia iia^ been for some time closely in- 
vested by the Syrian army under Benhadad, or 
more probaVily ll!i(la<le/i'r {Dndidri), if we follow 
the Assj'r. Jiinials (StadcK Of the defeats sustained 
by Israel i>riur to til''- -ic-r w.' ]\-A\i- nil informa- 
tion. Brnliadad 1 1! ail:i. Ii'/ri" i made an insolent 
drniand nl' I lii- 1 -i\ ki'r/. in I Ih' d'^-jirrai r cM i-rmity 
i>\ t 111' lat l.'l , ; hal S\ 1 laii i n \ uv , -lionld si-alch t lie 
royal palace and [\t<- Ihui-.'- oi A. - -^irvaiiis. Tliis 

• Wcllhaiiscirs rfir<'ii.''i ■ ! 11- . 'I' i '- 1 h !>. i is characteristic 
of his liiK'i (lycion until.' I 

t This took Jllace(lllriIl^r tli<> n'i;.'n i 1. ' i 1 t liholinlos), and 
lasted, acconling to McnaiKlir, ofif M .1. ' >; /'/ ■ i. ..i iliis niay 
have been tnie. 

was refused by A. with tln' unanimous approval 
of his people and tlnir ildir-. To the arrogant 
menace ot tbr Syrian, t 111- kiiiu ol 1-r. replied in the 
proverbial piira>i', ■ J, it not liiiii who girds on the 
armour boast as he who puts it oil.' iJcniiadad at 
once ordered the engines of war (LXX 'lines of 
circumvallation ') to be placed against the city. 
But beyond this he took no further precaution, and 
resigned himself with careless ease to voluptuous 
carousal with his mdiility and feudatory kin;.'>. 
Meanwhile A. niusteri'd his army of 7000 humi, 
officered by 232 territorial commanders, and 
attacked the Syrians with crushing eflect ( I K 
20""^'), inflicting a total overthrow. In the following 
spring the Syrian monarch again took the field with 
a well-appointed army of overwhilniinii^ MiticriDiity. 
The Syrians attributed their pre i he 

fact that the God of Isr. was ii dlls 

(where cavalry and chariots could not so well 
operate*). If they could draw the forces of A. 
into the valley near Aphek, all would be well. 
But the battle that followed utterly falsified their 
expectations. The Syrians were put to utter rout, 
and saved themselves by precipitate flight to Aphek. 
Benhadad and his followers went as suppliants ta 
A., who judged it politic to receive them with 
friendliness. A treaty was concluded, in wlueh the 
Syrian king conceded to Isr. special quartersfst nets) 
in Damascus,t a privilege which corresponth d \\ ith 
a similar right which Omri was compelled to con- 
cede to Syria in his own capital, Samaria. 

With the defective Biblical records before us, it 
is not easy to explain the complaisant attitude of 
A. in the hour of his victory. But the key to the 
solution of the mystery is given to us in the Assyr. 
annals. From these we learn that about this time 
a new disturbing factor was beginning to appear 
in W, Asian politics. Ever since the time of Saul 
the arena of Pal. foreign politics had been circum- 
scribed within the region of the Ilittite, Syrian, and 
Can. borders, and the interference of K^iypt had 
only been occasional. Since the days of Tiglath- 
pileser I. (c. B.C. 1100) the military power of Assyria 
had been dormant. But during the time of Omri 
there were vivid signs that Assyria was at length 
awakening from its century long slumber, under 
the energetic rule of A^Sur-nazir-jal. Diiriiiu the 
reign of his successor Sh;ilniaiii--iv iSulinaim- 
a§aridu) ll., who reigned from S60-825, it began to 
press more heavily on the lands near the Mediter. 
border, and to extend its boundaries towards the 
Hittite States. About the year 857 the powi i 
of this monarch threatened seriously the Pal. 
region. The king of Syria Avould be among the 
first to feel apprehension. The immediate effect of 
Shalmaneser's advance was to put an end, at least 
for a time, to the wars between Syria and Ahab. 
And in the negotiations described in 1 K 20*'- ^ it is 
pretty certain that the advance of the Assyr. 
power from tlie N.E. formed a subject of conversa- 
tion between the two kings, and that Benhadad 
was glad, even uijoa disadvantageous terms, to get 
rid of a burdensome and exhausting war. in onler 
that all his forces might be reserved to cnniiont 
the formidable Assyr. foe. The attack was de- 
livered in the year B.C. 85), wluii the l)attle of 
]FCarkar was fought. A considerai)le number of 
States, including Israel, but not including Judah, 
Edom, or Moab,t had united with Iladadezer 

• We know that the Israelites also possessed chariots in con- 
siderable number, from the express statement of tlte monolith 
inscription of Shalmancscr n. lines 91, 92. Cf. 1 K 22. 

i Ewald (Ge». d. V. Isr. iii. 4S8 n.) translates the Heb. by 
'places of abode' (comparin}? the Arab. mahattnlA. i.r. inniia- 
nent amboasadorial residence. But this ejcplan r 
fetched. LXX renders iliimif, 'streets.' For • 
tions see Thenlus, ad loc. 

i In the case of Moab, the reason adduced by Tn f 
probably the right one. Moab sent no contingent, Ix 
State was thenln revolt agrainst Israel (IICM p. 303). 

( = Dadidri = Benhadad) to resist the Assj'rians. 
The account of the vhole campaign may be read 
in the monolith inscription quoted in Schrader's 
COr^ i. 1 83 ff. In lines 91 , 92 we read that A. , kin^ 
of Israel, sent a contingent of 2000 chariots and 
10,000 men. The total defeat of the allied kings, 
though probably obtained with heaA'y loss to the 
Assyrians, sufficed to break up the alliance. A. 
now followed the short-sighted policy of isolation 
in presence of the formidable Assyr. power — a 
policy which in the following century Ephraim and 
Judah in turn pursued \nth baleful results. The 
consequence was a renewal of the wars between 
Syria and Israel, which had been for some years 
suspended. We may infer from the scriptural 
account that A. took the initiative by endeavour- 
ing to recover Kamoth-gilead from Syria. Pro- 
baoh' the allied kings of Isr. and Jud. endeavoured 
to profit by the weakness of Syria after the over- 
whelming defeat sustained by the latter in the 
battle of Karkar. In 1 K 22 we have a vivid por- 
trayal of the dramatic scene between Micaiah, son 
of Imlah, and the prophets Avho prophesied in 
favour of immediate war with Syria (see MiCAIAH). 
For Micaiah the result was imprisonment as the 
penalty for his outspoken deliverance of the 
divine message. Undeterred by the gravity of his 
prophecy, A. and Jehoshaphat went forth at the 
head of their respective forces to battle. But A. 
resolved to secure his person against the Syrian 
archers by appearing in nis chariot divested oi the 
ordinary insignia of royalty. This precaution, 
however, did not avail him against the chance 
arrow of a bowman, which penetrated between the 
ioints of his breastplate. The king of Isr. slowly 
bled to death, and died about sunset. His body 
was conveyed to Samaria, where he was buried. 

In the foregoing account of the S\ rian wars of A. we have 
adopted the sequence of events recommended by Schrader 
(CO 72 i. 189 ff., who gives the AssjT. text and tr.), Ed. Mever 
{Gesch. deg AUerthums, i. 393), and recently by Sayce {ECU 320, 
392), which places the battle of Karfear near the close of A.'s 
life. On the other hand, Wellhausen (art. ' Israel ' in Eneycl. 
Brit.) places the battle of Earkar and the alliance with (or, as 
he deems it, vassalage * to) Syria in the times that precede the 
SiTian wars of A.'s reign. But this view imposes great diffi- 
culties on the chronology of the period. From the Assyr. 
C^anon of Rulers, compiled with great care and precision, and 
also from the Assyr. Annals, we obtain the following fixed 
dates : — 

Battle of Karkar (in which A.'8 contingent takes 

part) ' . ' 854 B.C. 

Tribute of Jehu, ' son of Omri ' . . . . 842 „ 
Now, if we place the battle of Karkar before the Sj-rian wars of 
A.'s reign, his death cannot be placed earlier than B.c. 847. 
Accordingly, in place of the 14 years assigned by Scripture 
to the reigns of Ahaziah and Jehoram we can only allow a 
maximum of fice years ! On the other hand, by adopting the 
sequence which we have advocated, the difficulties are con- 
siderably reduced. A.'s death may then be placed in the year 
B.C. 853. Kamphausen, in his valuable treatise on the Chrbno- 
logj- of the Heb. Kings (p. 80), suggests that .\.'s name has been 
confused with that of his successor Jehoram in the Assyr. 
Annals ; and Kittel, in his Hist, of the Uebrews (Germ. ed. iL 
233), seems disposed to accept this view. But against this pro- 
ceeding we must emphatically protest. Biblical science will 
never make sure progress if we reject or modify archaeological 
evidence in the interests of a chronological theory. The theory 
must be conformed to the evidence, not vice vertd. (On the 
subject of Heb. chronologj- see the writer's remarks in Schrader's 
C0r2 ii. 320-324, and also in C. H. H. Wright's JBtWe Reaierg' 

That A.'s rule was firm though despotic, and 
maintained the militarj- traditions inaugurated by 
Omri, is indicated by the Moabite Stone, which 
informs us {lines 7, 8) that Omri and his son ruled 
over the land of Mehdeba (conquered by the 
former) for 40 years. It was not till the con- 
cluding part of A.'s reign, when he was occupied 
■with his Syrian wars, that >Ioab rose in insurrection. 
The historian must not fail to take due note of the 

• The large contingent (2000 chariots and 10,000 men) furnished 
by A., according to the Assjt. records, renders the theorj- of 
• vassalage ' extremely improbable. 

Judaic tendency of the narrative in 1 K 18-22, 
which paints the life of A. in sombre hues. When 
more than a century had passed after the destruc- 
tion of his posterity, it is worthy of remark that 
the Ephraimite prophet Hosea (I'') expresses a 
strong condemnation of Jehu's deeds of blood. In 
Mic 6'*, on the other hand, we see clearly reflected 
the Judaic estimate of Omri's djmastj', which 
dominates the accoimt in 1 K 18-22. 

OwEX C. Whitehouse. 
AHAB ("K^iK, 2nx). — Son of Kolaiah, a false pro- 
phet contemp. with Jer. He is said to have been 
' roasted in the fire ' by the king of Bab. (Jer 29^). 

AHARAH (mqx).— A son of Benj. (1 Ch S^) ; per- 
haps a corruption of C7n»i (Nu 26*^). See Ahirah. 

AHAKHEL ('^rprj*).— A descendant of Judah (1 Ch 
4*). LXX d5eX(pov 'Pt/xo'/S implies a reading 2rn 'nx 
= brother of Rechab. 

AHASBAI (';cr»?).— Father of Eliphelet (2 S 23»*), 
and a member of the family of Alaacah, settled at 
Beth-Maacah (20^^), or a native of the Syrian 
kingdom of ^laacah (10*-^). In the parallel 
passage (1 Ch n^-ssj ^^ find two names, isn -nn, 
Ur, Hepher ; both passages probably represent 
corruptions of the real name. 

J. F. Stexxing. 

AHASUERUS (srnifrjt?).— A name which appears 
on Fers. inscriptions as Khsajarsd, and in Aram, 
without K prosthetic, as r-n-n (Schrader, COT^ 
ii. 63). The monarch who bears this name in 
Ezr 4" was formerly reckoned by Ewald and others 
to be the Cambyses of profane history who suc- 
ceeded Cyrus. It is generally recognisetl, however, 
bjr modern critics that he must be identified with 
Xerxes (485-465), who is beyond all question the 
Ahasuerus of the Bk of Est*. See Xerxes. The 
A. of Dn 9^ the father of Darius the Mede, is a 
personage whose identity is as difficult to establish 
as the existence of ' Darius the Mede ' is proble- 
matical. (Cf. Driver LOT 515 n. ; Sayce HCM 543. ) 

J.* A. Selbie. 

AHAYA (Kjqx). — The name of a town or district 
in Babylonia (Ezr 8^^- «'• *^), and of a stream in the 
neighbourhood (v.*^- ''•^i). On the banks of this 
stream Ezra encamped for three days at the begin- 
ning of his journey to Jerusalem. He was thus able 
to review his large company, and to make good the 
absence of Levites by sending a deputation to the 
chief of the settlement at Casiphia. Before com- 
mencing the march, Ezra instituted a solemn fast, 
and then took measures for the safe custody of the 
treasures and rich gifts which were in his posses- 
sion. Ewald conjectured that the river Abava or 
Peleg-Abava was the same as the Pallacopas, a 
stream to the S. of Babylon. Rawlinson identifies 
it with the Is (see Herod, i. 179), a river flowing by 
a town of the same name, now called Hit, which is 
about eight days' journey from Babylon. It seems, 
however, more prob. that Ezia made his rendezvous 
near to Babylon itself ; in that case we may suppose 
that t!ie Ahava was one of the numerous canals of 
the Euphrates in the neighbourhood of the city (cf. 
Ryle, and Berth. -Rys. ad loc). In 1 Es 8^" the 
river is called Theras (Qepdi). 

H. A. White. 

AHAZ (inx ' he hath grasped,' LXX *Ax<if, Jos. 
'Axcij-jyj, NT'Axaf [WH'Axas]). — Son and successor 
of Jotham king of Judah. His name is probably 
an abbreviated form of Jeho-ahaz (inxi.-:;), since it 
appears on the Assyr. inscriptions as la-u-ha-zi. 
The date of his accession has been fixed at 735 B.C. 
His age at this time is given as twenty (2 K 16^) ; 
but this is barely reconcuable with the other chrono- 
logical data, which allow sixteen years to his 
reign, and state the age of his son Hezekiali at 



his accession as twenty-five, since it would make 
Ahaz a father at the age of eleven. The difficulty 
is increased if we suppose that the son pns'sed 
through the fire by Aiiaz was his firstborn ; and 
if, with several authorities, we allow only eight 
years to his reign, it is quite insui>erable. There 
can be little doubt that the figures need correc- 
tion. For twenty there is a slightly supported 
various reading, twenty -five, and this may be 
right. It is possible that the age of Hezekiah 
should be reduced, since Ahaz seems from Is 3'- 
to have been still youthful at the beginning of 
his reign. The date of his death is probably 
715 B.C., though many place it 728-727 B.C (see 

Quite early in his reign, Rezin king of Syria, 
and Pekah king of Israel, formed a coalition with 
the object of forcing Judah into an alliance against 
Assyria. According to our oldest authorities they 
met with little success, though the Syrians wrested 
the port of Elath from Judah, and Isaiah bade the 
king have no fear of * these two tails of smoking 
firebrands.' To confirm the wisdom of his counsel, 
he invited him to ask any sign from God. Ahaz 
was too panic-stricken to listen to cool reason, 
and, under the pretext that he would not tempt 
God, refused the proH'ered sign, whereupon the 
prophet gave him the sign of Immanuel. The king 
called in the aid of the king of Assyria, Tiglatli- 
pileser, who gladly accepted such an opportunity, 
and relieved Ahaz of his foes. But the relief was 
purchased dearly. Judah could form no alliance 
Avith a great empire like Assyria ; it could only 
become tributary to it, even if the tribute was 
disguised under the name of a present. And 
tribute meant oppression of the poorer classes, 
which was already one of the most glaring of 
Judah's sins. Further, it was of vital importance 
that the nation should keep free from entangle- 
ment in the politics of large empires, since other- 
wise it lost its independence, and made even internal 
reform— wliich was the most pressing necessity 
— more difficult. The policy of A. illustrates the 
be.setting weakness of the politicians of Judah, 
and was shortsighted and disastrous. If Isaiali's 
advice had been followed, A.wduM have secured 
the same result without its (l:s,nlv;nitn,!^'cs, since in 
her own interests As.syria Avould have been com- 
pelled to vanquish the coalition, while Judah 
would have retained her independence. 

We next find A. at Paniascus, where he rendered 
homage to Tiglath-pilescr. While there he saw 
nil !iltar which pleased liiiii. aiid sent the pattern 
I't it to the priest Urij.ili, ^^ith instructions to 
luiilil one lik(! it. On liis return he offered on his 
new altar, and ordered it to l.i> used for the sacri- 
tiers. vliil(' the old brazen altar wns used for the 
kin.' to ' inquire by.' W. It. Sniitli lia^ carefully 
oi~(uss((l this innovation, and readied tlie result 
that it ' lay in the erection of a permanent altar- 
hearth, ami in the introduction of the rule that 
in ordinary cases this new altar should serve for 
the blood ritual as well as for the fire ritual ' 
(RS^ 485-9). The importance of this consists in the 
fact that the alteration seems to have been a 
permanent one. For the other changes introduced 

Dy A., see •_• 1\ U;-- >\ 

In char I'll A. vas \vr:ik yet obstinate, frivolous 
and i^oincthing of a dilettante, as we gather from 
his iiiKrest in his new altar, and from the associa- 
tion of his name with a dial or step-clock (see 
Dial). He Avas also superstitious, and probably 
a polytheist. While no blame need attach — in the 
pre - Deuteronomic period — to his worship at 
numerous local sanctuaries, qind while lie was 
evidiiilly ,1 very zealous worshipper of J", yet 
lin- lari he pa.ssed his son tlirough the fire 
ruvealij Ihu dark superstition to which he was 


a slave. And the terrible picture of the condition 
of Judah, painted in Is 2-5 and other prophecies 
of this time, is clear as to the idolatry, drunkenness, 
luxury, oppression, perversion of justice, grasping 
avarice, and shamelessness that poisoned the 
national life. 

So far the aceonnt has been draAvn entirely 
from 2 Kings and Isaiah, since they are our only 
trustworthy sources, in 2 Chron. the narrative has 
been thoroughly worked over. The history of the 
Syro-Ephraimitish invasion is told (initedifVerently. 
There is indeed no hint of a (oaiiiioti, the two 
armies act independently. The Syrians carry 
away a large number of captives, and i'ckah slays 
120,000 in one day and carries av.iy '2)0,000 
captives, who, however, are sent back at the 
advice of a prophet. The invasions have no 
political motive assigned, they are a punishment 
for the king's sin, while the figures are altogether 
incredible. Ti^lath-pileser is called in, not to 
crush the coalition, but to help him ajainst the 
Philistines and Edomites. He did not In Ip him, 
however, but apparently came against him, and 
was bought off with tribute. The religious apos- 
tasy of A, comes out in much darker colours, 
and the account is really in conflict with the older. 
He burns his children, and not his son nienlv. in 
the fire ; closes the teni]ile and destroys it 
though we know that he took great interc- 
services; and worships the gods of Damascus 
because of the success of the Syrians in war, 
though when A. visited Damascus their power 
had been utterly broken. Of all this the older 
history says nothing, and it is impossible to re- 
concile these later additions with the earlier 
narrative, and they are so characteristic of the 
chronicler's method of re-writing history, that any 
attempt to do so would be superfluous. 

A. S. Peake. 

AHAZIAH (■'nv"^ ^^ "nn^ 'J" hath grasped').—!. 
King of Israel, son of Ahab. He is said to have 
reigned two years; but as he came to the ilirone 
in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat (1 K 22'M, and his 
brother Jehoram succeeded him in J( ho-hrqliat's 
18th year (2 K 3^), the duration ot' his rt i^rn 
would not much exceed a year. The chronological 
statement in 2 K 1", which would imply a reign 
of nearly ten years, is probably an interpolation 
(Griitz, etc. ) ; it is not found in h, and is misplaced 
in A. The INIoabite Stone dates the revolt of 
Mesha as taking place after 'half the days of 
Omri'sson'; but the Bible account (J K 1' 3') is 
more probable, which makes it a conse([ncncf' of 
the death of Ahab, who was a comparati\ ily 
powerful monarch. In any case wc do not read of 
any elVort to suppress this rising until the reign of 
Jehoram. It is possihlc" that Aha/iah was (•n.'a"-e(l 
in preparations for war win ii t!ic ac 
which resulted in his dealli. 11'' - 
inherited from his mother her devotion to [\;\:i]. tor 
in his extremity he sent to inquire at the oi.ule of 
Baalzebub, the special Baal worshi[tped at l',)<ron. 
The story of his fatal mission belongs rather ro the 
history of Elijah. It is sufficient here to u'" • ' ' > > t 
his thrice repeated summons of the pi 
characteristic of the son of Ahab and 
suggestive as it is of the callousness of his tat her, 
ana the obstinacy of his mother. See .Iiiiosii \- 
PHAT for the maritime allianci ' 
and that monarch. 

2. Ahaziah, king of Judah, \u...i;-. -v •.. w. 
Jehoram. He was made king by ' the inhabitants 
of Jerusalem ' (cf. 2 K 23'"), because all his elder 
brothers had been carried off in an. incursion of 
Philistines and Arabians (2 Ch -21- -'J'l. Mis 
name is variouslv tziven as Jehoaha/. i_'''h ~\''' 
^'.v-. .•ni.l A/ariah cJ-i"). The latter is pf,.i.aM,v a 
blunder, Ahaziah being read by some llcV). MSS, 




LXX, Pesh., Vulg. ; and Jehoabaz is merely a trans- 

E>sition of Ahaziah (cf. Jechoniah=Jehoiachin). 
XX has Ahaziah in 21", and omit3 the name in 
2o^. The other versions, except \ ulg., also ignore 
the change. He began to reign in the Ilth (2 K 
9^) or 12th (2 K 8*) year of Joram of Israel, 
bein^ then 22 years old, and reigned one year 
(2 K 8*). The reading 'forty and two' in 2 Ch 
22* 13 absurd, since his father was 40 years old at 
his death. Pesh. here has '22' and LXX '20.' 
The e>'il influence which Athaliah, the qneen 
mother, had exercised over her husband continued 
unchecked in the reign of her son (2 K 8-'', 2 Ch 
22»-;«) ; yet in 2 K I'l^ we read of ' hallowed things ' 
which he had dedicated apparently to J". 

There is an irreconcilable discrepancy between 
Kings and Chron. as to the death of A, Joram of 
Israel having renewed the attack on Ramoth- 
gilead in which Ahab had failed, was joined by his 
nephew A. The town was captured (2 K y«), but 
Joram received wounds which compelled him to 
return to Jezreel. It is implied that A. also 
returned to Jerusalem, for he ' went down ' to see 
Joram at Jezreel (cf. 1 K 22"^) (Ewald evades the 
difficulty by reading in 2 K 8^ ' now Joram went,' 
etc., omittmg 'with,' which is adopted in 2 Ch 22*^. 
According to Kings, on seeing Joram's fat«. A., 

Eursued by Jehu, ' fled by the way of the garden 
ouse ' (or 'Beth-haggan,'*Stade, etc.), was mortally 
wounded ' at the ascent of Gur,' and died on reach- 
ing Megiddo. His body was carried to Jerusalem, 
and ' buried with his fathers in the city of David.' 
Meanwhile the ' brethren of All aziah, 'ignorant of 
the revolution in Jezreel, had followed him from 
Jerusalem to visit Joram's children ; they were 
met by Jehu on the road between Jezreel and 
Samana, and were slain. Tliis seems a consistent 
story ; but when the Chronicler came to deal with 
it he found trvvo stumbling-blocks. First, he has 

f)reviously informed us that A. had no brethren 
iving; therefore ' the brethren of Ahaziah' become 
in his record ' the princes of Judah, and the sons 
of the brethren of Ahaziah ' attending their master 
in Samaria or Jezreel ; secondly. Kings implies 
that A., an idolater, was buried in the royal 
sepulchres. Now the Chronicler always carefiilly 
excludes idolaters {e.g. Jehoram, Joash, Amaziah, 
Ahaz) from 'the sepulchres of the kings,' and 
therefore he makes A., who was hiding in &Lmaria. 
be killed and buried there ; that he is buried at all 
being for the sake of his good father Jehoshaphat. 
Enough has heen said to show that here, as else- 
where, the Chronicler, if more edifying, is not so 
reliable as the earlier TAiiter. 

N. J. D. White. 
AHBAN '';;-x 'brother of an intelligent one '). — 
A Judahite, son of Abishur (1 Ch 2=»), 

AHER (--.y ■ another >.— A Benjamit« (1 Ch 7^, 
perhaps identical with Ahiram of Nu 26". 

AHI ('r:»? ' brother' ; * by many considered to have 
the same meaning as Ahijah, wh. see) occurs 
in MT, and consequentlv in AV and RV, twice : (1) 
a Gadite (1 Ch 5^) ; (2) an Asherite (1 Ch 7**). 
But the reading is in neither case free from doubt ; 
in 1 Ch 5'^ the Syr. omits the name, thus making 
yyu.ii j^jj uninterrupted genealogy of AbihaU; 
but the LXX, which gives Za^oi-xdu, ('Axt^oOj;, A) 
vloD 'A35e^\ for "yx-izfc p 'nx n2, must have had 
something very like -nx before them. The other 
VS.S treat •.-}« as an appellative. In 1 Ch 7** for 
n:.Tm TK, LXX, B has 'Axiowa, A 'Ax«oipA 'Oyti. 
Probably in the original continuous Heb. text 
some compound name in "'>"» was read (? rrnit), 

* For a fuller "iisoussion of the mesminjf of this name 
and the foUonin-,' names begmniiig with Ahi, see Nams, 

followed by another name of which the letters ran 
(in n3.Tni) are a mutilated survival. 

G. B. Gray. 
AHI AH. — See Ahuah. 

AHIAM (cxTi^, meaning doubtful, according to 
some, ' mother's brother '). — One of David's heroes. 
He was son of Sharar (2 S 23"), or Sacar (1 Ch 11»), 
the Hararite. 6. B. Gray. 

AHIAN (i;ro!t 'fraternal,' B 'laaeifi^ A 'Aefr; 
these forms, together with the divergent text of 
the Syr., render the exact form of the original 
name uncertain). — Ahian was a Manassite, and is 
described as 'son of Shemida' (1 Ch 7"); but the 
name is scarcely that of an individual ; note in the 
context Abiezer and Shechem, and cf. Nu 26^^. 

G. B. Gray. 

AHIEZER (i^r'rx, 'brother is help').— 1. Son of 
Amniishaddai, one of the tribal princes who 
represented Dan at the census and on certain other 
occasions (Nul" 2^ 7**-^ 10* (P)). 2. The chief of 
the Benjamite archers who joined David while he 
was in hiding at Ziklag (1 Ch 12i-»). 

G. B. Gray. 

AHIHUD (-Rrr-jt ' brother is majesty.' In the form 
-.r,-r.K (1 Ch 8®) the second n is probably an error 
for n). — 1. Ace. to P, Ahihud the son of Shelomi 
was the prince (tt-e:) of the tribe of Asher, who, 
with similar representatives of the other tribes (on 
W. of Jordan), was appointed by Moses, at the 
divine command, to divide Canaan into hereditary 
portions (Nu 34^ (P)). 2. A Benjamite. Probably 
the passage 1 Ch 8*- ', the text of which is somewhat 
corrupt, means that Ehud begat Ahihud, and that 
Ahihud and his 'brother' Uzzawere ancestors of 
the inhabitants of Geba. G. B. Gray. 

AHIJAH (^;-Jt or vrnx 'brother of J"').—!. 
High priest in the reign of Saul, and usually 
identified with Ahimelech (Josephus 'Abime- 
lech ') of 1 S 21. 22 (so Ewald Mist, of Isr. iL 
p. 415, n. 3, 'since Melech, Kin^, may be applied 
also to God'). He accompaniM Saul's army as 
possessor of the ephod oracle (1 S 14') ; but when 
an occasion arose for its use, Sanl, with hi^ usual 
precipitate self-reliance, interrupted the priest 
while in the very act of consultation ( w.^ ^). This 
temerity seems to be afterwards tacitly reproved 
by Ahijah (v.*^) : ' Let us draw near hither unto 
God.' The LXX reading in v." ' Bring hither the 
ephod,' etc., is followed by Jos. {Ant. vi. vL 3 : 'He 
bade the high priest Xa^lrra riir ipxifforucifw aroMp 
■TfKxtnfre&eiw'), and accepted by most modems. The 
phrase, ' bring hither,' seems appropriated to the 
ephod (1 S 23* 30^); and when the oracle is again 
consulted (14'"), the LXX 5oj 3tjXow . . . Wi baio- 
TT7TO,' Vulg. ' da ostensionem ... da sanctitatem,' 
appears to point to the Urim and Thummim which 
were attached to the ephod. On the other hand, 
the ark seems to be used as an oracle in Jg ^f^, 
1 Ch 13', and it often accompanied the host to 
battle. Aq., Sym., and Vulg. follow the Received 

We next read of this high priest, when David, 
fleeing from Saul, comes to mquire of the Lord 
by his means (1 S 22^"), as he had often done before 
(22^). The tabernacle appears to have been 
transferred to Nob from Smloh when the latter 
was desolated (Ps 78®, Jer 7^" 26*-»), probably 
just after the death of Eli (to whom ' the priest — 
bhiloh,' 1 S 14', refers). Ahimelech's alarm at 
the appearance of so great a man (22") unattended, 
was sulaved by David's plausible explanation ; and 
he actually gave .the fugitive the shewbread of the 
priests, and the sword of Goliath, which had been 
suspended as a votive offering. L'nfortunately, 
there was a witness of the priest's well-meant zeal. 




Doeg the Edoniite, who was performing some vow. 
Not long after, David's worst anticipations (22*-) 
were realised. Ahiniolech, with the eighty-five 
(LXX, 3U5 ; Josephus, 385) priests of ' his father's 
house,' was char-'cd with conspiracy by Saul, 
and, notwithstanding his arna/ed protestations 
of innocence, condemned to instant deatli. Doeg, 
who did not share the traditional reverence 
felt by the kin'^'s giiard for tlie priests of J", 
carried out the bloody order with tlie unnatural 
cnieltj of his race. Abiathar alone escaped. 
The judgment on Eli's house was being con- 

2. The Shilonite, of Shiloh (1 K W), is the pro- 
phet of the rise and fall of Jeroboam I. In 1 K 11^ 
we find the young ruler thinking out his plans of 
rebellion in a lonely walk, when he is met hy 
Ahijah, who comes to consecrate and control his 
ambitious designs. The prophet (LXX, RV) had, 
doubtless by divine command (cf. Is 20-, Jer 13'), 
clad himself with a new garment. This he rends 
in twelve pieces, and giving ten of them to 
Jeroboam promises him the reversion, on Solomon's 
death, of the kingdom over ten tribes, and, con- 
ditionally, 'a sure house' like that of David, 
repeating at the same time the divine judgment 
which had been already (vv.*'** I)-) revealed to 
Solomon, probably through Ahijah hi?nself. Years 
pass by ; Jeroboam has realised his ambition, but 
not the ideal set before him by tlie prophet. His 
eldest son falls sick. The king bethinKS him of 
the true seer now [60 years] old and blind ; but, 
fearing lest his defection might elicit an adverse 
answer, he sends his wife [Ano] disguised as a poor 
woman, with a poor woman's olFering [' loaves, two 
cakes for his children, grapes, and a jar of honey ']. 
A divine revelation, however, has already un- 
iii.i-ki 1 (ho deception. Ahijah [sends his lad to 
meet iier and bring her in, treats her gifts with 
scorn] anticipates her with the ' heavy tidings ' of 
the extirpation of Jeroboam's house, tiie dispersion 
of Israel, and, bitterest of all, the death of her 
child [' Thy maidens will come forth to meet thee, 
and will say to thee. The child is dead . . . and 
they will lament for the child, saying, "Ah Lord I " 
. . . and the wailing came to meet her']. The 
second Greek account, from which the details in 
brackets are derived, is found in B after 12**, and 
places this event before Jeroboam's accession — an 
impos.sible place, — introduces Ahijah as a new 
character (2 K 14-), and also ascribes to Shemaiah 
a symbolical projihecy similar to that of Ahijah, 
but spoken at Shechem before tiie rejection of 
Rehoboam. 14^"="* is omitted in B, but found in A, 
etc., supplied, according to Field, from Aquila. 
These facts and the want of connexion in ua*-* 
lead W. K. Smith to conclude that ' both parts of 
the story of Ahijah are a fluctuating uncertain 
element in the text ' (OTJC 1 19). Ewald also says 
that 14*' "• " are later additions {Hist, of Isr. iv. 
p. 29, n 3). Jos. [Ant. Vlll. xi. 1) gives the verses 
in a different order, 

Ahijah was one of the historians of Solomon's 
reign according to 2 Ch 9^. 

8. 1 K 4', one of two brothers, Solomon's scribes 
or secretaries. Their father Shisha (Seraiah, 
2 S 8" ; Sheva, 2 S 20" ; Shavsha, 1 Ch 18i«) held 
the same post under David. 4. Father of kin" 
Baasha, 1 K 15"» 21", 2 K 9». 8. 1 Ch 22» (LXX 
dSeX^t airrov), youngest son of Jerahnieel, or his 
first wife, if we read with Bertheau, ' of or from 
Ahijah,' D having dropped out. See next verse. 
6. 1 Ch 8^ one of the 'heads of fathers' houses' 
of Geba, a son of Ehud, for which read ' Abihud,' 
v.» (Pesh., Gratz), or ' Alioah ' (v.*). In the begin- 
ning of the verse read ' namely ' for 'and.' The 
text is very obscure. Sec Q.P.B. 7. 1 Ch 11'", 
the Pelonite, one of David's mighty men; but 

Kennicott, etc., read instead 'Eliam — Gilonite,' 
from 2 S 23". 8. 1 Ch 2&^. (In David's time) ' of 
the Levites, Ahijah was over the treasuries.' 
LXX, followed by Bertheau, etc., reads, 'the 
Levites, their brethren (i.e. the sons of Ladan, 
v.a'), were over,' etc. 9. Neh Iff* (RV Ahiah), 
one of ' the chiefs of the people ' who sealed to 
the covenant under Neheiniah. 

N. J. D. White. 
AHIKAM (oij'rts 'my brother has arisen').— Son 
of Shaphan, a courtier under Josiah, mentioned as 
one of the deputation sent by the king to Huldah 
the prophetess (2 K 22'--»*, 2 Ch 34^), and later 
as using his influence to protect Jeremiah from the 
violence of the populace during the reign of 
Jehoiakim (Jer 26-''). He was father of (!edaliah, 
the governor of the land of Jud.ih iij'iKiiiiled by 
Nebuchadnezzar (2 K 2.")- al. ). 

AHILUD (^5'7'^K, jxTliaps a i- , of 'nj} 

rh\ 'child's brother •).—l. (2 S S"' 2U-', 1 K 43, 
1 Ch 18^'). — Father of Jehoshaphat, the chronicler 
under David and Solomon. 2. (1 K 4^^) Father 
of Baana, one of Solomon's twelve commissariat 
officers. C. F. BuRNEY. 

AHIMAAZ (['yp'ns 'my brother is wrath'). — 1. 
Son of Zadok. He was a remarkably swift runner, 
whose style was well known (2 S 18-''), and as such 
he played an important part on the occasion of 
Absalom's rebellion. As had been arranged by 
David (2 S \^-^'--^--ii-^), he and Jonathan, son of 
Abiathar, ' stayed by En-rogel, and a maidservant 
used to go and tell them,' from the priests, the 

flans of Absalom which had been divulged by 
lushai, ' and they went and told King David.' 
This must have occurred more than once (2 S 17"). 
Details of their last and most critical adventure 
are given (17^""-^), when, aided by a woman's craft, 
they succeeded in conveying the news that saved 
David's life. After the battle, Ahimaaz ofTered 
his services as messenger of victory ; but Joab, 
fearing that the odium of being the first to tell of 
Absalom's death might injure the young man's 
prospects, refused, out of kindness, to allow him 
to run, and entrusted the duty to the Cushite 
courier. Ahimaaz, however, saw a way out of the 
difficulty; Joab yielded reluctantly to his impor- 
tunity, and Ahimaaz ' ran by the Avay of the Plain ' 
(the fioor of the Jordan valley, Gn 13*" etc.); and 
by superior swiftness, and also, as is implied, by 
taking an easier route, ' overran the Cushite.' lie 
did not belie David's description : ' He is a good 
man, and cometh with good tidings,' for by an 
adroit siippressio veri he achieved liis purpose, and 
left to the Cushite the ungrateful olfice of breaking 
the king's heart. We read nothing more of Ahimaaz 
after this. It does not appear that he was ever 
high priest, since Azariah his son ( 1 Ch 6*- *) seems 
to have succeeded Zadok (1 K 4-). 2. (1 S U*") 
Father of Ahinoara, Saul's wife. 3. (1 K 4") One 
of Solomon's twelve commissariat ollieers. He had 
the district of Naphtali as the iiekl of his operations. 
Since he alone of the twelve has no father men- 
tioned, it has been conjectured that he may pos- 
sibly be the son of Zadok ; but he surely would 
have succeeded his father in the high priesthood. 
Ahimaaz married Basemath, one of Solomon's 
daughters. Another of these officers made a similar 
alliance, which indicates that they held a high 
rank. N. J.' D. White. 

AHIMAN (ir'r'{< : on the form, see Moore as cited 
Ijelow). — 1. The sons of Anak or Anakites (see 
Anak) are frequently mentioned, chiefly in D ; but 
the special names Aliiman, Sheshai, and Talmai 
occur only in JE (Nu 13'--, Jos 15'^) and Jg V^, cf. 
V.**. According to these passages, Ahiman, 




Sheshai, and Talmai were ' sons ' or ' children of 
Anak ' {p:il^ '33 or 'yn 'tS' : for the latter, cf. n'*?' 
ns")!^ 2 S 2P^- ^'*), whose father was Arba (Jos 15'^, 
perliaps P). But, as a matter of fact, neither 
Anuk ( = long-necked) nor Arba (=four: with 
Kiriath-aria cf. Heer-sheba) are personal names 
(see Moore, Judges 1^). There ls therefore no 
reason to doubt what the context of the above- 
cited passages suggests, viz. that Ahiman, Sheshai, 
and Talmai are the names, not of individuals, but 
of clans. 

A., then, was a clan resident in Hebron (the 
more familiar name of Kiriath-arba) at the time of 
the Heb. conquest, and driven thence by Caleb. The 
clfin may have been of Aramaic origin, since the 
names of Sheshai and Talmai are of an Aram, type, 
and the name Ahiman has analogy in Aram, as 
well as Heb. See further. Driver, Deut. p. 23 f.; 
Moore, Judges, p. 24 f . 

2. The name of a family or division of door- 
keepers, 1 Ch 9". This name is absent, not only 
from the briefer list in Neh IP*, but also from the 
longer list in Ezr 10^ ( = 1 £s 5'^). It is possible, 
therefore, that the name (icnx) in Chron. is simply 
due to dittography from the following word cthn 
( = their brethren) ; if this be so, it may have been 
facilitated by association with the Anakites (see 
No. 1), the preceding name in Cliron. — Talmon — 
closely resembling in sound the Anakite Talmai. 
But the genuineness of the name is defended by 
Bertheau ; cf. the four names in v." and the four 
divisions suggested by vv.^"^. G. B. GRAY. 

AHIMELECH (TiVr?'nt!'brotherofMelek(Molech)'). 
— 1. The son of Ahitub, and grandson of Phinehas. 
He either succeeded his brother Ahijah in the 
priesthood, or was the same person under another 
name (1 S 14-'-^'*). On the supposition that they 
are identical, the main facts regarding him (1 S 2P"* 
22*-''*) are given under AlllJAll ; see also DOEG. In 
2 S 8" and 1 Ch 24" it is generally supposed 
that the names of Abiathar and Ahimelech have 
been transposed by a copyist, so that we need not 
reckon another Ahimelech, grand.son of the first. 
2. A Hittite, who joined David when a fugitive, 
and became one of his captains (1 S 26"). 

R. M. Boyd. 

AHIMOTH (nis'riK, apparently ' brother is death '). 
— Mentioned only in the genealogy of 1 Ch 6'^ 
(Heb. v^"), where lie appears as son of Elkanah and 
brother of Amasai. For a discussion of the text 
and purpose of the genealogy, see Bertheau ; cf. 
also Mahath (v.35). G. B. Gray. 

AHINADAB (^irnx 'brother is generous'). — Son 
of Iddo, one of the 12 officers appointed by Solomon 
for the victualling of the royal housenold. He 
was stationed at Mahanaim ( 1 K 4^^*). 

G. B. Gray. 

AHINOAM (Dj;:'n.s ' brother is pleasantness '). — 1. 
Daughter of Ahimaaz and the wife of Saul ( 1 S 14""). 
2. Ahinoam the Jezreelitess was one of the two 
women — Abigail being the other — whom David 
married after Michal liad been taken from him. 
A. and Abigail were both with David while he 
sojourned with Acliish at Gath, and were sub- 
sequently at Ziklag ; from the latter city they were 
carried oti" by the Amalekites, but rescued by David 
and his men (1 S 30^*). After Saul's death A. and 
Abigail went up to Hebron with David, and there 
A. gave birth to David's firstborn, Amnon (1 S 25^^ 
2V S(fi, 2 S 2- 3^ 1 Ch 3^). G. B. Gray. 

AHIO (VnN) — 1. Appears to be the name of a son 
of Abinadab (No. 1), and brother of Uzzah who 
drove the cart on which the ark was placed when 
removed from Abinadab's house (2 S 6*- *, 1 Ch 13"). 
In all three cases the LXX renders the word o'l 

uoeXtpol avroO, wliich merely involves a difTerent 
pronunciation of the same consonants — itin ; this 
may be right, but on the whole a proper name seems 
more probable in the context. 2. (LXX d5eX(p6s 
(A dSeXipoi) avTov, 1 Ch 8'^ ; dSe\(p6s (A d5e\<^oi, 1 Ch 
9^) ) A son of Jeiel, and brother of Kish, the 
father of Saul. 3. Another Ahio is mentioned in 
the genealogy of Benjamin (1 Ch 8"). Here also 
the LXX has d5eX0ds (A adeX^oi) airrov, and in this 
case is probably right. Cf. Bertheau, in loco. 

G. B. Gray. 
AHIRA (i•T^l^?). — Son of Enan, one of the 12 tribal 
princes who rei^resented Naphtali at the census 
and on certain other occasions (Nu 1^* 2^ 778.8s 
1(F (P) ). 

AHIRAM, AHIRAMITES {ayn^, >zyri<n < brother 
is exalted'). — The eponym of a Benj. family — the 
Ahiramites, Nu 26-''* (P). The name A. occurs in 
the corrupt forms '-N (see Ehi) in Gn 46^^ (P), and 
mqN (see Aharah) in 1 Ch 8^ ; in defence of the 
originality of the form Ahiram, see Gray, Stud, in 
Heb. Proper Names, p. 35. G. B. Gray. 

AHISAMACH (-^d'hn ' brother has supported '). — 
A Danite, father of Oholiab (AV Aholiab), Ex 31" 
3531 38-^ (P). 

AHISHAHAR {^-f-ti (pausal form) 'brother is 
dawn ') is described in the Benjamite genealogies as 
one of the ' sons of Bilhan,' 1 Ch 7^". See under 

AHISHAR (i^''"s 'my brother has sung'). — Super- 
intendent of Solomon's household (I K 4"). 

AHITHOPHEL (Wn^nK 'my brother is folly'— 
Oxf. Heb. Lex.), was a native of Giloh, a town in 
the south-western part of the highlands of Judsea, 
identified uncertainly with a village three miles 
north-west of Halhul. He was a very influential 
counsellor of David, his reputation for political 
sagacity being unrivalled ; but he was destitute of 
principle, a man of craft rather than of character 
(2 S 151^-172^, 1 Ch 27^=*). He joined the rebellion 
of Absalom, possibly through ajubition, possibly 
out of sympathy with the resentment of his tribe 
of Judah at the decline of its tribal pre-eminence. 
It is supposed by some that he was also the 
grandfather of Bathsheba (cf. 2 S 23^ with 11^); 
but the identification of her father with the son 
of A. is open to question, though certainly possible. 
The policy he advised was that Absalom should 
take possession of his father's harem, thus showin" 
t hat no pardon could be expected from David, and 
that he sliould proceed at once in pursuit of his 
father. When Hushai's counsel of delay prevailed, 
A. recognised the necessary failure 01 the enter- 
prise, withdrew to Giloh, and hanged himself 
(2 S 17^). There is no other case of deliberate 
suicide, except in war, mentioned in the OT, 
and the parallel in the NT is the case of Judas 
Allusions to A. have been found in Ps 41* 55'-'" 
59^' and elsewhere ; but these must not be treated 
as designed, and no inference can be drawn from 
them as to the authorship of the jisalms. The 
Talmud and Midrashim occasionally refer to him. 
In the latter he is classed Avith Balaam as an 
instance of the ruin which overtakes wisdom that 
is not the gift of Heaven ; and in the former (Baba 
bathra 1. 7) the great lesson of his life is said to be, 
'Be not in strife with the house of David, and 
break off from none of its rule.' K. W. Moss. 

AHITOB (B 'Ax"Tci;3, A 'Axtr-, AV Achitob), 
1 Es 8'. — An ancestor of Ezra, son of Amarias and 
father of Sadduk [AhitubJ. 

H. St. J. Thackeray. 




AHITUB (3«3'n|< 'brother is goodness'). — 1. Son 
of I'hinolias and ^'randson of Eli, the father of 
Ahinielech or Ahijalj the priest who was put to 
death by Saul (1 S 14^ 22«- »). 2. Ace. to 2 S 8" ( = 

1 Ch is'') the father, ace. to 1 Ch 9'i Neh 11" the 
grandfather, of Zadok the priest who was con- 
temporary with David and Solomon. It is very 
doubtful, however, whether this A. does not owe 
his existence to a copyist's error. The text of 

2 S 8" sliould probably run nScniqa -fl'3Ki pnsi 
aio'niqn : ' And Zadok and Abiathar the son of 
Ahimeloeh, the son of Ahitub' (so Wellhausen, 
Budde, Kittol, Driver). 3. Still more exposed to 
suspicion is the existence of another A., father of 
another Zadok (1 Ch 6"-", 1 Es 8^, 2 Es V). i. 
An ancestor of Judith, Jth 8^ AV Acitho. 

J. A. Selbie. 

AHLAB (aJ-riK), Jg l".— A city of Asher. The 
site is supposed to be that of the later Gush 
Halab or Gischala (Jos. Life, 10 ; Wars, xi. 
xxi. 1), now El-Jish in Upper Gsililee ; but this is, 
of course, uncertain. See Neubauer, G6og. Tal. 
s.v. Gushiialab; and Reland, Pa/. Illustr. p. 817. 


AHLAI (-\t\h 'O that!' ef. Ps 119»).— 1. The 
daughter (?) of Shcshan (1 Ch 2»i, cf. v.^^). 2. The 
father of Zabad, one of David's mijjhty men 
(1 Ch ll"'). 

AHOAH (-^HK).— Son of Bela, a Beniamite (1 Ch 8^ 
= n'nM of v.^). See Ahijah (6). The patronymic 
Ahohlte occurs in 2 S 23». 

AHUMAI(':;ini<).— A descendant of Judah (1 Ch 4*). 

AHUZZAM (cjnK 'possessor,' AV Ahuzam).— A 
manof Judah (1 Ch 4«). 

AHUZZATH (T\m ' possession ').— ' The friend ' of 
Abimelech, the Piiilistine of Gerar, mentioned on 
the occasion when the latter made a league with 
Isaac at Beersheba (Gn 26-'"). The position of 
' king's friend ' may possibljr have been an official 
one, and the title a technical one (cf. 1 K 4-^ 
1 Ch 27*2). The rendering of the LXX gives a 
diflTerent conception, that oi ' pronubus ' or friend 
of the bridegroom ('OxofAfl 6 vvfi<payurybs a&roC). For 
the fem. termination -ath, cf. the Phil, name 
' Goliath ' (see Driver's note on 1 S 17*) and the 
Arabian name ' Genubath '(IK 11^). 

H. E. Ryle. 

AHZAI ('tnx for n;ir{t M" hath grasped,' AV 
Ahasal).— A priest, Neh lli»=Jahzerah, 1 Ch G^*. 

AI ('yn), Jos T"-" 8^» 10»'» 129, Ect 2M Neh 7'- 
(Jer 49^, a clerical error for AR), called Hal in 
Gn 128 13s A V ; and Aija («;« 'Ayyd) in Neh ll-'^. 
In Is (10*) Aiath (ny).— Tlie name means 'heap,' 
and it is not enumerated as an inhabited place 
after the conquest until about B.C. 700, but seems 
to have been inhabited after the Captivity. The 
situation is defined as east of Bethel, beside Beth 
Aven, with valleys to the north and west (Jos 
gn. 12) 'pj,e gi(^ which agrees with these con- 
ditions is found at Haiy&n, immediately south of 
a conspicuous stone mound called Et-Tell, 'the 
mound.' There is a deep ravine to the north, an 
open valley to the west, and a flat plain to S. and 
E. This site is 2 J miles S.E. of Bethel, and on 
the road thence to the Jordan Valley. It is 
evidently the site of an ancient town, with rock- 
cut tomlw. See SWP vol. ii. sh. xiv. Some MSS 
read Aija for Gaza (i.e. .ry for my) in 1 Ch 7*, 
which appears to be the correct rendering. 


AIAH (.T<<)._1. Son of Zibeon (Gn 36" (AV 
AJah), 1 Ch 1^). 2. Father of Rizpah, Saul's con- 
cubine (2 S 3' 21»- "• "). 

AIATH, Is lOM; AIJA, Neh ir*».— See Al. 

AIJALON (iSV;k), AV Ajalon, Jos 10" 19^*, 
2 Ch 28'" ; Aijalon, Jos 21^ Jg l^a 12", 1 S 14" 
1 Ch «»" 8'^ 2 Ch HI" (in Jg 12'^ a place of 
the name is noticed in Zebulun, otherwise un- 
known). — This town in Dan was in the Shephelah, 
beneath the ascent of Bethhoron. It is the modem 
village of Ydlo. The name appears to mean ' place 
of the deer.' The town is clearly noticed in a 
letter from the king of Jerusalem, in the Tel el- 
Amama correspondence, as A ialuna. It was known 
to the Jews in the 4th cent. a.d. (Onomasticon, 
s.v. Aialon) as less than 2 Roman miles from 
Emmaus-Nicopolis, on the road to Jerusalem. This 
agrees with the situation of Yalo and 'Amwfts. 
See SWP vol. iii. sheet xvii, 


AIJELETH HASH-SHAHAR, Ps 22 (title).— See 

AIM. — To • aim at,' in the sense of 'conjecture,' 
'make guesses at,' occurs Wis 13* 'For if they 
were able to know so much that they could aim at 
{(TToxo-^ofjLai, RV 'explore') the world.' Cf. H. 
Smith (1593), 'No marvel if he did aim that his 
death was near at hand.' J. Hastings. 

AIN (V, usually spelled 'Ayin, and represented 
in transliteration by ') is the sixteenth letter of 
the Heb. Alphabet (wh. see), and so is used to 
introduce the sixteenth part of Ps 119. See 

AIN (i^y ' an eye, or spring '). — 1. On the northern 
boundary of Israel, as given Nu 34". It lay 
west (S. W. ?) of Riblah, It is almost impossible 
now to describe the boundary there given. 
Riblah has been identified with the village still 
bearing that name, 20 miles south-west of Hums 
(Emesa) and Zedad, with Sada.d some 30 miles 
east of Riblah ; other points are unkno-n-n. Robin- 
son, following Tliomson, places Ain at 'Ain el-'Asy, 
the main fountain of the Orontes, about 15 miles 
south-west of Riblah (Researches (1852), p. 538). 
Conder identifies this with Hazor-Enan (Heth and 
Moab, p. 7 ff.). A description of this fountain 
of the Orontes will be found in the passages 
referred to. On the whole question, see under 
Palestine, and other places named with Ain 
in Nu 34^-1' ; also A. B. Davidson's Ezekiel, pp. 
351 .352. 

2! Jos 15^ 19' and 1 Ch 4?^. Here Ain and 
Rimmon should apparently be read as one name, 
Ain-Rimmon = En-ltimmon, which see. 

A. Henderson. 

AIR (d:5;p>, dT)/j, oi)pa.v6%) is the first of the three 
divisions — 'the heaven above,' 'the earth beneath,' 
and ' the water under the earth.' Its usual sense 
is the atmosphere resting upon the earth, with 
special terms for the higliest heavens and for air 
in motion, as wind, breath, etc. As the locality of 
air is above the earth, so its language is that of 
the supernatural. As the emblem of the insub- 
stantial, and the antithesis of ' flesh and blood ' 
(Eph 6'*), it is regarded as the dwelling-place 
of powers which, though under God, are over 

Satan is described as ' the prince of the power of 
the air' (Eph 2"-), and the war of the Lord is there 
lifted out of all tribal provincialism, and declared 
to be a world-wide conflict between elemental good 
and evil. For safety and success in this battle ' the 
whole armour of God ' is needed. In Dt 32" the 
heathen gods are called Shedhim, the term by which 
modem Jews denote the malignant spirits that are 
considered to infest the air. The fear of oHending 
them makes the uneducated Jewish -svoman say, 




' By yonr leave ' ! when throwing out water from 
her door-step ; and the dread of their congregated 
power makes the Jews walk quickly in the funeral 
procession. The same superstition passed into the 
Christian Church with regard to the efficacy of the 
passing bell. The Jews in the synagogue-worship, 
when repeating the solemn watchword of Israel, 
'Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy GJod is one Lord,' 
prolong the pronunciation of the word -^x ' one,' as 
a protection against the hostility of the air-powers. 
See DEMoy. G. M. Mackie. 

AKAN (ipi).— A descendant of Esau {Gn 36^). 
The name appears in 1 Ch 1'*^ as Jakan. 

AKATAN {'AKardr, AV Acatan), 1 Es8».— Father 
of Joannes, who returned with Ezra, called Hak- 
katan, Ezr 8»^ 

AKELDAHA (Ac 1" WH 'AxeXSa/idx, TR 'AiceX- 
Safid, AV Aceldama). — The popular name of 'the 
field of blood,' bought ^rith the money paid to and 
returned by the traitor, Mt 27*"^". The language 
of Ac 1'* seems also to imply that it was so named 
as the scene of his suicide. It is not impossible 
that a spot so defiled would be eagerly sold and 
bought in the circumstances described. Such a 
place must hare always been needed (Jer 28^), 
and at the time this ' field ' was purchased, owing 
to the multitude of 'strangers' dwelling in and 
^^siting Jerusalem, there may hare been urgent 
need for a larger place of burial, and a tlifficulty 
of procuring land for such a purpose. The place 
had been previously known as ' the potter's field,' 
and seems to be identified with ' the potter's house ' 
of Jer 18"^ 19^, which was in the valley of the son 
of Hinnom, the scene in earlier times of Molech- 
worship, and subsequently defiled as a place of 
burial (Jer 7*^-^, 2 K 23^"). The traditional site 
is stUl known as Hakk-ed-Dumm (in the 12th 
cent, called Chaudemar, a manifest corruption 
of the original). It is situated half-way up the 
hill, to the south of the Pool of Siloam, on a level 
spot. ' It is now a partly ruined building, 78 ft. 
long outside and 57 ft. wide, erected over rock- 
cut caves and a deep trench.' Originally there 
had been tombs cut in a natural cave, whicli forms 
the inner or southern part ; and though these 
have been broken up to enlarge the space, six 
' loculi ' remain on the western side and two on 
the eastern. A deep trench has been cut in front 
of the original rock-tombs, 30 ft. deep, 21 ft. 
A\'ide, and 63 ft. long. The wall built on the 
outer edge of the trench is about 30 ft. high. A 
stone roof thro\^-n over the trench joins the hUl 
face (PEFSt, 1892, p. 283 ff.). Apparently there 
was a cliff here wnth a natural cave in the 
face of it. This may have been used, as caves 
frequently are, as a potter's workshop. But the 
name of the gate, ' Harsith,' Jer 19* ' the gate of 
potsherds,' would rather indicate that the site of 
the potter's workshop was close by the gate, and 
not across a valley from it ; his work would also 
require a supply ol wat«r to be at hand ; nor can 
the Valley of Ilinnom be said to be conclusively 
identified. According to Eusebins, Akeldama was 
on the norih of the city ; Jerome (by a slip or of 
design) places it on the south. From the seventh 
century (Arculph) it has been pointed out on the 
presently accepted site. Krafft (Top. Jer. p. 193) 
says he saw clay dug at Hakk-ed-Dumm ; but 
Schick denies that potter's clay is found there, and 
says that only a kind of chalk used to mix with 
clay is got higher up the hill ; but even if it were, 
clay is not used where it is found, but where 
facilities for its use are greatest. The ownership 
of the spot has been more valued in later times than 
when purchased by the chief priests. In the 12th 

cent, the Latins got it from the Syrians, in the 
16th cent, it was in the possession of the Armenians, 
in the 17th cent, of the Greeks, and it passed again 
to the Armenians, who at the close of that centunr 
paid a rent for it to the Turks. More strange is 
the virtue attached to its soil of quickly consxuning 
dead bodies, because of which, notwithstanding its 
history, 270 shiploads are said to have been taken 
to form the Campo Santo at Rome, and seven 
shiploads to Pisa for a like purpose. Schick cal- 
culates the accumulation in it of bones and small 
stones at 10 to 15 ft. deep. A. Hekderson. 

AKKOS ('A<c<rii'5, A ; 'kK^dn, B ; AV Accoz), 1 Es 
5'*=Hakkoz (wh. see). 

AKKU6 (:??i).— 1. A son of Elioenai (1 Ch S**). 
2. A Levite, one of the porters at the E. gate of 
the temple, the eponym of a family that returned 
from the Exile (1 Ch>s Ezr 2«, Neh 7** \V» 12»), 
<»lled in 1 Es 5^ Dacubi. 3. The name of a family 
of Nethinim (Ezr 2*^), caUed in 1 Es o^* Acnd. 4. 
A Levite who helped to expound the law (Neh 8'). 
LXX omits. Called in 1 Es 9** Jacnbas. 

J. A. Selbie. 

AKRABBIM fz iipi n^?), Nu 34*, Jg 1*. Less 
correctly Acrabbim Jos 15* AV, 'The Scorpion 
Pass.' — The name given to an ascent on the south 
side of the Dead Sea, a very barren region. See 
DE.VD Sea. C. R. Coxder. 

AKRABATTINE {' kKpa^rrlvri) in Idumsea (1 Mac 
5*, AV Arabattine). — The region near Akrabbira. 

ALABASTER. See Box, Mixerals. 

ALAMOTH, Ps 46 (title), iCh IS^".— See Psalms. 

ALBEIT.— Albeit is a contraction for 'all be it,' 
and means 'al(l) though it be.' Properly it should 
be, and sometimes is, followed by ' that ' ; but when 
regarded as a single word (=although), 'that' is 
omitted. It occurs only in Ezk 13' 'a. I have 
not spoken,' and Philem'* 'a. I do not say to 
thee ' f RV ' that I say not unto thee ') ; but is more 
freq. in Apocr., Wis U* Sus^"** 1 Mac 12^ 15» 
2 Mac 4". J. Hastings. 

ALCIMUS (c'p:^x 'God sets up,' grecised into 
'AXjct^ws, ' valiant,' and abbreviated into c'p;, whence 
Id/cet.uoT, Jos. Ant. XII. ix. 5, and 'Idrt.uos, ib. XX. 
X. 3) was the son {BaJ>a bathra L 33), or more pro- 
bably the sister's son [Midrash rabbi 65 et al. ), of 
Jose ben-Joeser, the famous pupil of Antigonus of 
Socho. He was a native of Zeruboth, of Aaronic 
descent, but a leader of the Syrian and Hellenizing 
party. By Antiochus Eupator he was nominated 
to the high priesthood (B.C. 162), but was unable 
to exercise its functions on account of the in- 
fluence in Jerus. of Judas Maccabaens. Retiring to 
Antioch, he gathered around him ' the lawless and 
ungodly men of Israel' (1 Mac 7'), by which is 
probably meant such members of the Hellenizing 
party as had been driven from Jerus. by the 
successes of Judas. As soon as Demetrius Soter 
had established himself at Antioch, the party of A. 
charged Judas with treason, and secured the king's 
favour for themselves. Demetrius was persuaded 
to renominate A. to the high priesthood, and to 
send an army under Bacchides, governor of 
Mesopotamia, with orders to install A. and to 
punisli the Maccabees. The march of Bacchides 
does not appear to have been opposed ; and at 
Jerus. it was found that many of the Hasidim 
were ready to support A., ostensibly because of his 
priestly descent, but really perhaps because of their 
suspicion of the dynastic designs of Judas. Sixty 
of their leaders, amongst whom is said {Midrash 




rabba) to liavo been Jose l>en-Joeser himself, were, 
however, soon after put to death together, by tlie 
order of the joint representatives of tlie Syrian 
king ; and on the part of Bacchides further cruelties 
followed. The etfect was to reduce the people to a 
condition of sullen submission ; and Bacchides 
returned to Antioch, leaving a suilicient force to 
maintain A. in his priestly and vice-regal dignity. 
For a very short time the supjwrt of the Syrian 
troops enabled him to carry out his Ilellenizing 
policy. But a reaction soon took place in favour 
of the party of Judas, who forsook the retirement 
in which he had remained during tbe presence of 
Bacchides in the country, and made himself master 
of all tlie outlying districts. A. went in person to 
the king, and by means of large presents secured 
the despatch of a second force under Nicanor, who 
was appointed to the governorship of Judaea. 
Nicanor at lirst formed an alliance, and apparently 
an intimate friendship, with Judas. But A., dis- 
pleased at the nej'lect to install him in his office, 
returned again to Demetrius, who sent strict orders 
to Nicanor to seize Judas and bring him at once 
to Antioch. Judas managed to escape from an 
attempt to overcome him by treachery ; and the 
two armies met at Adasa, near Bethhoron, on the 
13th of Adar (March, B.C. IGl). Nicanor fell in 
the battle, and the Syrian army was almost 
annihilated. Another army was collected by 
Demetrius, and sent into Judaia under the com- 
mand of Bacchides. Judas was defeated and slain 
at the battle of Eleasa, and Bacchides proceeded to 
occupy Jerus. This time Bacchides remained in 
the country, and eflectually protected A., who was 
at last able to discharge without hindrance his high 
priestly duties. His chief object appears to have 
oeen to abolish the separation of Jew from Greek. 
With that view he commanded the destruction of 
' the wall of the inner court of the sanctuary,' and 
also of 'the works of the prophets.' The former 
has been identified with the Soreg, or low wooden 
breastwork before the steps leading between the 
courts ; but the allusion seems to be ratlier to the 
wall itself, markin<^ the limits beyond which 
Gentiles and the unclean were not allowed to pass. 
This was one of the separatist characteristics of the 
temple, ascribed in tradition sometimes to Haggai 
and Zechariah, sometimes to the members of the 
Great Synagogue. But before the destruction was 
coniploted, A. died (B.C. 160) of paralysis. Pss 74. 
79. 80 have been interpreted as reflectin'? the senti- 
ments of pious Jews during his priesthood. But 
the best authority for the period is 1 Mac 7"'*' 9*"", 
though cautious use may be made also of 2 Mac 
W'-'', and Jos, Ant. XII. ix. 5, Xli. x. 

R. W. Moss. 
ALEMA (iy 'AXdfiois A, 'AX^^is k), 1 Mac S-"*.— A 
city in Gilead. The site is unknown. 

ALEMETH (n^^v)- — 1- A son of Becher the 
Benjamite ( 1 Ch 7*, A V Alameth). 2. A descendant 
of Saul (1 ChS^fg^-). 

ALEPH (X).-Firsf letter of Ileb. Alphabet. 
See Alimi.vhkt, Psalms, and A. 

ALEXANDER ('AXi^ia»'Spoi).— The name occurs 
five times in NT, and aj:>parently belongs to as 
many distinct persons. 

1. Mk 15-^ A son of Simon of Cyrene, and 
brother of RuFUS (see these names). A. and 
Rufus are evidently expected to be familiar names 
to the readers. Very possibly they were Christian 

2. Ac 4®. ' Annas the high priest teas tliere, and 
Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many 
as were of the kindred of the high priest' (RV). 
Of this A. nothing further is known. The sug- 

fjestion of Baronius, Pearson, and Lightfoot, that 
le was the well-known Alabarch (on this title see 
Schiirer, UJP II. ii. 280) of Alexandria and brother 
of Philo (Jos. Ant. XVIII. viii. 1, cf. XIX. v. 1), 
* scarcely needs serious discussion ' ( Kdersheim). 
Philo was of high and wealtiiy birth (Jos. XX. v. 2), 
but Jerome's statement {de Vii-is Illustr. xi.) that 
he was ' de geuere sacerdotum ' is unsupported by 
any evidence. 

3. Ac 19^, 'And some of the multitude in- 
structed A., the Jews putting him forward. And 
A. beckoned with the hand, and would have made 
a defence unto the people. But when thev per- 
ceived that he was a Jew' . . . etc. etc. (liVni). 
The Jews were a natural and usual object of 
the religious animosity (cf . UpoauXoi \.^', and lio 2'^^), 
which on this occasion they had done nothing to 
provoke. A. is put forward by his co-religionists to 
clear them of complicity with St. Paul, but the en- 
raged mob will give no Jew a hearing. The absence 
of any tis suggests (cf. v.*) that A. was well known at 
Ephesus ; he may even have been one of the ipydrai 
or Texvirat of v.^, and thus identifiable with No. 5 ; 
but this, although it is stated (by Ewald, apud 
Niisgen, inloc.) that Jews were sometimes engaged 
in forbidden trades, lacks evidence. 

4. 1 Ti 1 '»•=». Mentioned with HymeKAEUS (cf. 
2 Ti 2") as one of tlie unconscientious teachers who 
had 'made shipwreck concerning the faitii.' St. 
Paul ' delivered them unto Satan ' (cf. 1 Co 5', and 
see Satan). There is no strong reason to identify 
this A. with No. 5. 

6. 2Ti4'*. This A. (1) was a smith (xa\/ce<yj). 
The word originally meant a worker in copper ; but 
as other metals came to be more commonly worked, 
it became applicable (Lid. and S. s.v.) to workers 
in any metal, esp. iron (Gn 4-"- LXX, see also 
Trades). This makes possible, but by no means 
proves, the identity of A. with No. 3, if the latter 
could be shown to be one of the craftsmen of Demet- 
rius. (2) A. had ' done ' (iveSd^aTo) St. Paul many 
evils ; in particular he had greatly withstood (\lav 
avTecTT-q, cf. Ac IS**) his words. (3) Timothy is 
cautioned against a like experience. This last i)oint 
locates A. with Timothy at Ephesus, and makes it 
probable that (2) also refers to something that had 
taken place when St. Paul was last there ( 1 Ti P). 
If (2) refers to heretical teaching, our present A. 
might be identified with No. 4. But (2) is equally 
compatible with Jewish hostility ; and if so, we 
might combine (I) and (2) with the object of identi- 
fying him with No. 3. In any case No. 5 is the 
only possible link between 3 and 4. For specimens 
of the many possible conjectures on the whole sub- 
ject, see the comm. in loc. and Holtzmann, I'astor- 
albrkfe, p. 255 so. If, with many critics, we rejjard 
the Epistles to Timothy as non-Pauline, Me might 
follow the last-named writer in regarding Ac 19" 
as the basis of the notice in 2 Ti ; but in reality 
the two passages have nothing in common except 
the name ; the malicious personal antagonism 
which is so prominent here is unhinted at there. 


ALEXANDER III. CKki^avbpoi, 'defender of 
men '), known as the Great, was the son of Philip II., 
king of Macedonia, and of Olvmpias, a Molossian 
princess, and was born at l"^ella, B.C. 356. He 
succeeded his father in B.C. 336, and two years later 
set out on his eastern exnedition. The battles of 
the Granicus (B.C. 334) and of Issus (B.C. 333) made 
him master of S.W. Asia. Egj'pt was next sulxlued, 
and Alexandria founded in B.C. 331. The discon- 
tent of his army thwarted his designs upon India, 
and in B.C. 323 he died at Babylon. 

For Alexander's connexion with the Jews, the 
principal authority is Jos. Ant. IX. viii. 3-6. The 
story runs that, whilst he was besieging Tyre, A. 
sent orders to the Jews to transfer theii- allegiance 




to liiin, and to supi>ly him with provisions and 
auxiliaries. The high priest refused on the ground 
of liis oath of fidelity to Darius. A. destroyed 
Tyre, took Gaza (B.C. 332) after a two months' 
siege (Diodor. xvii. 8; Arrian, ii. 26, 27), and 
marched against Jerus. The high priest Jaddua 
(Neh 12"), or Simon the Just (Yoma 69), was 
tauglit in a dream what to do, and led out the 
priests and the people to meet him. At Sapha 
(nsy ' he watched ' ; known also as Scopus, Jos. 
Wars, V. ii. 3, an eminence near Jerus. whence city 
and temple were all visible) the priest and the 
king met. A. bowed before the divine name on 
the priest's tiara, and to the protestations of 
Parmenio replied that in a dream at Dium he 
had seen such a figure as Jaddua's, and had 
been promised success and guidance on the way. 
Escorted by the priests, he entered Jerus., sacri- 
ficed in the temple under the direction of the high 
priest, and, when shown the Book of Dan., inter- 
preted of himself such passages as 8'-^ and II'. 
Before leaving the city he guaranteed to the Jews 
in all his dominions protection in the usages of 
their fathers, and immunity from taxation in their 
sabbatical years. How much of this story is legend- 
ary, it is impossible to decide. It is found in the 
Talmvid as well as in Josephus. The silence of the 
classical historians (Arrian, Curtius, Plutarch, and 
the Epitomists) is inconclusive, as they are gener- 
ally silent concerning matters relating to the Jews. 
The position and the suspected attitude of Jerus. 
make a visit on the part of A. probable in view of 
his contemplated expedition against Egypt. And 
though imagination has clearly been at work with 
the details of the narrative, the balance of proba- 
bility is in favour of its substantial historicity. 

By A. Palestine was included in the province of 
Cojle - Syria, which extended from Lebanon to 
Egypt. The governor was Andromachus, who chose 
as his residence the town of Samaria, because of its 
central position, and possibly also of the amenities 
of the neighbourhood. Against him the Samaritans 
rose in revolt, prompted by jealousy of the privi- 
leged Jews, by resentment at the establishment 
amongst them of the seat of government, or by the 
opportunity aflorded by the absence in Egypt of 
such of their compatriots as were most favourably 
disposed towards A. (Jos. Ant. XI. viii. 6). Setting 
tire to the house of Andromachus, they burnt him 
alive. The news reached A. just after he had 
received the submission of Egypt ; and, hastening 
back, he put to death the leaders of the revolt 
(Curt. iv. 8. 10), and removed the rest of the people 
from tlieir city, planting a colony of Macedonians 
in their stead. From that time Shechem, at the 
foot of Mt. Gerizim, became the religious centre 
of the Samaritans. Coins of A. have been found 
coined at Aslikelon and Acco (Ptolemais), and also, 
if Milller's identifications are correct, at Cfesarea, 
Scythopolis, and Kabbah (Miiller, Numismcitique 
d' Alexandre, 303-309) ; but it cannot be inferred 
with confidence that these towns were made by him 
sub-capitals of districts, as such coins were issued 
by the Diadochoi long after the death of A. Not 
only were large numbers of the Samaritans settled 
by him in the Thebais (Jos. Ant. XI. viii. 6), and of 
Jews in Alexandria (ib. xix. v. 2; Apion. ii. 4) and 
in the Egyp. villages (see the evidence of papyri in 
Mahatiy, Ptolemies, 86, n. ), but many of the latter 
appear to have willingly enrolled themselves in his 
army, \yhen he was rebuilding the temple of Bel 
in Babylon, his soldiers were ordered to assist in 
removing the rubbish. The Jews are said to have 
refused on the grounds that any dealing with 
idolatry was forbidden them, and that their Scrip- 
tures predicted the permanency of the destruction 
of the temple of Bel. They were threatened and 
punished in vain. Appealing to A., they were 

exempted from the task, in virtue of the original 
stipulation that they ' should continue under the 
laws of tlieir fatliers.' The incident again is of 
doubtful authenticity ; but it is in agieement with 
all the traditions of the kindly attitude of A. 
towards the Jews. 

In the Biblical books A. is expressly mentioned 
only in 1 Mac P"^ 6^, though several passages in 
Dan. are frequently interpreted as alluding to him. 

Literature. — The sources of A.'a history are examined in 
Freeman, Hist. Essaijg, 2nd ser. Ess. 5, to which add Paulj', 
RE, art. ' Alexander,' and MahafPy, Ptoleviien, where in § 56 
evidence is adduced in favour of ttie novel sujjgestion, that A.'s 
friendship to the Jews was due to his desire to use them as a 
kind of intelligence department to his army. For the rabbinical 
traditions see Derenbourg, Uist. de la Pal. i. 41 ff.; Hamburger, 
RE ii. 44-47. Droysen, Gesch. Alex, des Grossen (Hamburg, 1837), 
and Gesch. des Hellenismus (Gotha, 1877) are of special value. 

R. W. Moss. 

ALEXANDER BALAS was either a natural son 
of Antiochus Epiphanes (Jos. Ant. xiil. ii. 1 ; Liv. 
Epit. 50; Strabo, xiii.), or a lad of Smyrna who 
claimed such descent (Justin, xxxv. 1 ; Appian, 
S>^r. 67). In the latter (more likely) case, Balas was 
his proper name, and its etymology is unknown ; 
in the former case the name may be connected 
with the Aram. n)-j.^ 'lord.' He also assumed his 
reputed father's title of Epiphanes (1 Mac 10^). 
He was set up as a pretender to the throne of 
Demetrius Soter, whose despotism had alienated 
his subjects and ottended his neighbours, by the 
three allied kings, Ptolemy Philometor of Egypt, 
Attains II. of Pergamum, and Ariarathes V. of 
Cappadocia. The Eomans also supported his 
claims (Polybius, xxxiii. 14. 16), in accordance 
with their policy of promoting civil strife within 
kingdoms that might become formidable. He 
secured the help of Jonathan (B.C. 153) by nomi- 
nating him high priest, and after some reverses 
defeated Demetrius, who fell in the battle. Balas 
thereupon married Cleopatra, daughter of Ptolemy 
Philometor (for a fuller account of whose relations 
with Balas see Mahatiy, Emp. of Ptolemies, §§ 208- 
212), and appointed (B.C. 150) Jonathan with 
special honours (Jos. Ant. XIII. iv. 2) (TTpar-rj-yds and 
pLfpiddpxvs, military and civil governor of the pro- 
vince, although Syrian commandants were retained 
in several of the principal fortresses. His kingdom 
now established, Balas proved himself an incapable 
ruler, negligent of State aflairs, and given up to 
self-indulgence (Miiller, Fragm. Hist. Grcec. ii. 
prsef. xvi, n. 19 ; Liv. Epit. 50 ; Justin, xxxv. 2). 
Demetrius Nicator, son of Dem. Soter, invaded 
the country in B.C. 147, and was supported by 
ApoUonius, governor of Coele-Syria. But Jonathan 
defeated and slew ApoUonius, and was rewarded 
on the part of Balas by the gift of Ekron. Balas, 
however, was deserted by his own soldiers and by 
the people of Antioch. Ptolemy, his father-in-law, 
entered Syria on the plea that Balas was plotting 
against him, and took up the cause of Demetrius, 
to whom he transferred his daughter Cleopatra in 
marriage. Balas hastened from Cilicia, where he 
had been trying to quell a revolt, but was defeated 
by Ptolemy. He was either Slain (B.C. 146) in the 
battle (Euseb. Chron. Arm. i. 349), or he fied to 
Aba;, in Arabia, where he was assassinated (Miiller, 
I.e. ; 1 Mac 11"). The relation of the Jews to 
Balas, and the consistency of their alliance, appear 
in 1 Mac 10^^, RV ' They were well pleased with 
Alexander, because he was the first that spake 
words of peace unto them, and they were con- 
federate with him always.' His necessities and 
his unconcern made Judsea almost autonomous. 

Alexander Epiphanes, 1 Mac 10' = A. Balas. 

R. W. Moss. 

ALEXANDRIA (r, 'AXe^dvSpeta), the Hellenic 
capital of Egypt, was founded by Alexander the 
Great, B.C. 332. Under the early Ptolemies it 




rose to importance, and became the emporium of 
the commerce of the East and of tue West. 
Oblong in shape and rounded at the extremities, — 
Strabo compared it to the chlamys or cloak of the 
Macedonian cavalry,— it occupied the narrow strip 
of land which lay "between the sea and the Lake 
Mareotis. An artilicial mole connected it with 
the island of Pharos, and on either side of the 
mole were commodious harbours which received 
the ships of Europe and Asia. The Lake Mareotis, 
which was joined by a canal to the Canonic mouth 
of the Nile, brought to it the commerce of the East. 
The beauty of the city was proverbial. One-third 
of its extent was occupied with royal palaces and 
open public grounds ; and it had a system of wide 
regular streets with noble colonnades. Its popula- 
tion, which amounted to about 800,000 souls in its 
nourishing period, consisted chielly of Egyptians, 
Greeks, and Jews, who occupied separate quarters. 
The Kegio Juda'orum, which lay in the north-eastern 
I)ortion of the city, was surrounded by walls. A 
special governor, called the Alabarch, presided over 
it, and the Jews were permitted to live according 
to their own laws. The Jews — the mercenary race 
as tliey were called— were not popular with their 
fellow-citizens, but they were protected by the 
rulers, Greek and Koman, who recognised the value 
of their services to the commercial prosperity of 
the city. When A. became part of the Roman 
Emjtire, B.C. 30, and a granary of Rome, the im- 
portant corn trade with Italy fell into the hands of 
Jewish merchants. 

The Lagidjc were munificent patrons of learning, 
and it was their ambition to make their capital 
a place of intellectual renown. They collected 
within its walls the largest libraiy of antiquity, 
part of which was housea in the temple of Serapis 
in the Egyptian quarter, and another part in tlie 
museum which was situated in the Bruchiura or 
Greek quarter. To the museum was attached a 
staff of professors, who were salaried by the State. 
It had a banqueting-hall in which the professors 
dined, corridors for peripatetic lectures, and a 
theatre for public disputations. The chief subjects 
of study were giammar, rhetoric, mathematics, 
astronomy, medicine, and geography. The school 
of philosophical thought which ultimately arose 
was eclectic, a patchwork of earlier systems, and 
it closed its career by dethroning philosophy in 
favour of religious traaition. 

For the student of Christian theology, A. 
occupies an important place in the history of 
religious development as the cradle of a school of 
thought in which the earliest attempt was made 
to bring the teaching of the OT into relation 
with Hellenic ideas. It was in A. that the Heb. 
Scriptures were first translated into Greek. 
This translation, although it afterwards became 
' the first apostle to the nations,' was not made 
with a missionary purjrose, being intended to afford 
a knowledge of the law to the numerous Jews who 
had grown up in ignorance of the Heb. language. 
But navin" opened up their trea-sures to the curious 
Greeks, it became necessary for the Jews to explain 
and to defend them. It was the claim of the Jew 
that the Scriptures are the sole source of a true 
knowledge of^ God and of human duty ; but when 
he became familiar with Greek literature, it was 
impossible to deny that there also were found noble 
doctrines and excellent counsels. The Alex- 
andrian Jew offered an Apologia for his exclusive 
claim, which was repeated l»y the Christian Fathers, 
lived through the entire Middle Ages, and almost 
to our own time. I'lato and I'ythagoras, he said, 
and even Homer, borrowed all their wisdom from 
the OT Scriptures. Aristobulus, a Jewish courtier, 
•who lived auout the middle of the second century 
B.C., writes : ' Plato took our legislation as his 

model, and it is certain that he knew the 
whole of it; the same is true of Pythagoras.' 
In order to gain venerated authority for thb 
assertion, the Jews composed verses in the name of 
the mystic poets of antiquity, in praise of Moses 
and of Judaism. In his commentary on the 
Pentateuch, Aristobulus introduces Orpheus, 
and makes him say that he cannot reveal the 
God whom clouds conceal ; that the water-bom 
Moses alone of mortals received knowledge from 
on high on two tables. Another writer of Egypt 
who was a contemporary of Aristobulus, the author 
of the third of the Sibylline Books, introduces the 
Sibyl of Cumue, who speaks of the Jews as a nation 
appointed by God to be the guide of all mortals ; 
and she offers the coming Alessianic salvation to 
all nations if they will turn from their idols to 
serve the living God. 

Having thus established to their own satisfaction 
that Gentile wisdom comes from the Scriptures, the 
Jews next proceeded to place it there by the help of 
the magic wand of allegorical interpretation. Thus 
interpreted, the narratives of Scripture easily 

Jielded up Platonic and Stoic dogmas. The 
ewish Alexandrian philosophy, which began with 
Aristobulus and culminated in Philo, was an 
elaborate attempt to clothe Greek jjliilosophical 
ideas in Scripture language, and thus to confer 
upon them the authority of divine revelation. It 
was to Platonism and Stoicism that the Jewish 
scholars most naturally turned ; for in the lofty 
monotheism of the former, and in the moral 
earnestness of the latter, they seemed to hear 
echoes of Isaiah and Solomon. It was through the 
influence of Platonic and Stoic conceptions that the 
Sophia and the Lo^os assumed such importance in 
the Jewish Alexandrian philosophy. In the Heb. 
Scriptures they had been personified, but they were 
now hypostatized, and became intermediaries be- 
tween tne creature and the Most High God. 

The Jewish philosophy of A., which was not 
confined to A., but spread through the whole of 
the Greek-speaking Diaspora, exercised a certain 
influence upon the Greeks, who were drawn 
towards Judaism by its accent of certainty about 
God, which was always wanting even in the loftiest 
theology of their own philosophers. Its main 
influence, however, lay in its Hellenizin" of the 
Jews, who were enabled to appropriate Hellenic 
views of life without conscious apostasy from 
Judaism. The extent of the influence of Jewish 
Alexandrian philosophy on the writers of the NT 
has been variously estimated. There are striking 
similarities between the terminology and some- 
times between the thoughts of St. Paul and of 
the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews and those 
of Philo. But the similarities are probably due to 
their common knowledge of the current teaching 
of the Greek-speaking synagogue. On the other 
hand, the direct practical spirit of the NT writers 
offers a strong contrast to the dieamy intel- 
lectualism of Pnilo's allegories. 

The name of the city of Alexandria does not 
occur in the NT. Mention is made of a synagogue 
of the Alexandrians in Jerusalem {Ac G^). Apollos 
is described as an ' Alexandrian by race ' (Ac 18**). 
St. Paul sailed on two occasions in Alexandrian 
ships, which probably belonged to the com trade 
(Ac 27« 28"). 

It is remarkable that neither St. Paul nor his 
companions visited A., in some respects the most 
promising missionary field in the world. As rej'ards 
at. Paul, to hazara a conjecture, he may have 
been deterred by what occurred in Corinth (1 Co 
P*), where Apollos followed him, and bv his preach- 
ing produced an unhappy division witfiout intend- 
ing it. St. Paul may nave felt that his simple pre- 
sentation of Christ crucified would be unwelcome 




among hearers accustomed to the -word of wisdom 
in trope and allegory. If we were to accept the 
view of those critics who hold that ApoUos wrote 
the Epistle to the Hebrews to the Jewish Chris- 
tians of A., it would be easy to explain St. Paul's 
conduct, as it would have been contrary to his 
custom to visit a Church which a feUow-labourer 
had already made his own (2 Co 10'*). 

According to Eusebius (H.E. iL 16), St. Mark was 
the first who was sent to Egypt, where he preached 
the gospel which he had written, and established 
churches in A. 'The multitude of believers,' 
he adds, ' both men and women, lived lives of the 
most extreme and philosophical asceticism.' The 
statement of Eusebius about St. Mark, which he 
introduces with the formula ' they say,' and con- 
nects with fanciful legends, has clearly no 
authority. His description, however, of the char- 
acter of the early Alexandrian Church is probably 
correct. During the second and third centuries of 
our era Alexandria was the intellectual capital of 
Christendom. In the Alexandiian heretics Basi- 
lides and Valentinus, and in the Church Fathers 
Clement and Origen, we observe how the spirit of 
Jewish Alexandrian philosophy passed into Chris- 
tianity. See Philosophy, Religion. 

LiTERATTRB. — Strabo, Gtog. xviL ; Eusebius, Prcepar, Evang. 
13 ; PoUr. Gr. xxL ; Or. Syh. uL ; D^hne, Ge*. DartUU. d. Jvd.- 
Alex. Rel.-Phiiot. ; Baoly-Wissowa, RE ; Drummond, PAOo- 
Jvdatui ; Bausrath, Time* of ApottUi. 

J. GiBB. 

ALGUM TREES, ALMOG TREES (qtp-j^k 'a^»». 
mim, 2 Ch 2* Q"*- "; c^-^hn almuggim, 1 K 1(F- ", 
LXX. ^vKa vevKiya ; Vulg. ligna thyina, ligna 
pinea). — Celsius {Hierobot. L 173) states that some 
doubted the identity of the algum and the almug. 
This doubt, however, is not justified by the trans- 
position of the letters in the two names. Such 
transposition is extremely common in Heb. proper 
names (e.g. Jiehum, crri, Jfeh 12^, is called in v.^ 
of the same chapter Harim, cryj). We are told that 
algum trees were brought from Ophir (2 Ch 9^% 
Almug trees were also brought from Ophir (1 K 
W^). These passages are perfectly parallel, and 
plainly refer to the same tree. 

But, in 2 Ch 2^, Solomon instructs Hiram to 
send ' cedar trees, fir trees, and algum trees ( AVm 
almuggim) out of Lebanon.' Did the term algum 
in Lebanon signify one tree and in Ophir another ? 
This is possible. Cedar, in Eng., is applied to 
various species of Cupressus, Abies, Juniperus, 
find Larix, as well as to Cedrtts Libani. Fir, in 
Eng., is applied to several species of Abies, and 
the Scotch fir is Finns sylvestris, L. Spruce is 
used in Europe for Abies excelsa, L., and in the 
United States for three species of Abies: A. Cana- 
densis, Mich., A. alba, Mich., and A. nigra, Poir. 
Instances of this might easily be multiplied. If 
we accept this supposition, the passage is amply 
explained. But it affords no clue to the name of 
the tree growing in Lebanon. If, on the other 
hand, the tree which Solomon requested Hiram to 
send was the same as that brought from Ophir, 
was Lebanon a station for it ? This is also possible. 
We do not know where Ophir was, nor what the 
tree was. It would be quite rash to say that it 
could not grow in both localities. The cedar, 
mentioned in the same clause, grows in Lebanon, 
Amanus, Taurus, the Himalayas, and the Atlas. 
It is also uncertain what Jir is alluded to in the 
passage. There are firs in Lebanon, and also in 
some, at least, of the localities proposed for Ophir. 
It is possible that the unknown tree had a range 
which included Lebanon and Ophir. 

The conditions for any candidate for the algum 
or almug tree, imported from Ophir, are — (1) that 
it should be a wood of sufficient value to make its 
importation from so distant a country as Ophir, be 

it Arabia, India, or the East Coast of Africa, pro- 
fitable ; (2) that it should be suitable for m>c9 
terraces (m. highways or stairs, more properly a 
staircase, 2 Ch 9"), and tjOQpiiiars (m. a prop or 
rails, more properly balustrade, 1 K 10"), ana for 
harps and psalteries. Fifteen different candidates 
have been proposed, among them thyine toood, 
deodar, fir, bukm {Ceesalpina Sappan). The 
majority of scholars, following the opinion of 
certain Rabbis, incline to the red sandal toood 
(Pterocarpus Santalina, L. ), a native of Coroman- 
del and Ceylon. There is not, however, a particle 
of direct evidence in its favour. Against it is the 
fact that it occurs now in commerce only in small 
billets, unsuitable for staircases, balustrades, or 
even the construction of harps and psalteries. It 
is, however, possible that larger sticks might have 
been cut in ancient times. 

In the uncertainty which must ever remain as to 
the identity of the tree intended, and with the 
probability that a considerable number of trees 
which grew in Lebanon are now extinct there 
owing to denudation of forests, and the possibility 
that the Lebanon algum may have been a different 
tree with the same name, it is needless to suggest 
an interpolation of the passage ' out of Lebanon " 
(2 Ch 2?). G. E. Post. 

ALIAH (n;=;i).— A 'duke' of Edora, I Ch 1« = 
Alvah, Gn 36*. 

ALIAN (i^r).— A descendant of Esau, 1 Ch 1«»= 

Alvan, Gn 36^. 

ALIEN.— See Foeeigkeb. 

ALL. — There are few words in the Eng. Bible 
the precise meaning of which is so often missed as 
the word 'aU.' The foil, examples need special 
attention. 1. When joined to a pers. pron. all 
usually follows the pron. in mod. usage, in early 
Eng. it often precedes it. Is 53* ' All we like sheep 
have gone astray ' ; but Is 64' * We all do fade as a 
leaf.' 2. All stands for 'all people' in 1 Ti 4"* 
' that thy profiting may appear to all.' 3. Follow- 
ing the Gr. (t£s), aU is used with a freedom which 
is denied to it in mod. Eng. In He V, 'without 
all contradiction,' all = any whatever. Cf. Shaks. 
Macbeth, IIL iL 11— 

' Thinga witboat »D remedy 
Should be without reg&nL' 

In Col 1" 'unto all pleasing' is a literal tr. of 
the Gr., and means 'in order to please (God) in 
every way.' Similarly all is used for 'every' in 
Dt 22* ' In like manner shalt thou do . . . with aU 
(RV 'every') lost thing of thy brothers' ; Rev 18« 
' all manner of vessels of ivory,' and even without 
the word ' manner ' in the same verse, ' all thyine 
wood.' 4. All means 'altogether' in 1 K 14'* 'till 
it be all gone ' ; Nah 3' ' Woe to the bloody city ! 
it is aU full of Ues.' Cf. Caxton (1483) ' The lady 
wente oute of her wytte and was al demonyak.' 
This is the meaning of ' all ' in ' All hail,' Mt 28*, 
literally, ' be altogether whole, or in health.' 5. AU 
appears in some interesting phrases. All along: 
1 S 28* ' Then Saul fell straightway all along on 
the earth' (RV ' his full length upon the earth ') ; 
Jer 41* 'weeping all along as he went,' i.e. 
throughout the whole way he went ; cf . ' I knew 
that all along,' i.e. throughout the whole time. 
All in all: 1 Co 15® 'that God may be all in 
all' (Gr. irdrro iv xaffir, all things in all [persons 
and] things). Cf. Sir 43»^ ' He (God) is all' (t4 raw 
iartf airrcs). Different is Shaks. (Ham. L iL 198) 
' tiake him for all in aU, 
I shall not look upon his like again,* 

where a// in o// is ' altogether.' All one: 1 Co 11' 
'that is even all one (RV 'one and the same 




thing') as if she were shaven' ; Job 9" RV,' It is 
all one' (Heb. K'n-nn^t), i.e. it is a matter of inditter- 
ence. All the whole occurs in Ps 96' Pr, Bk. 
'Sin},' unto the Loud, all the whole earth' (AV 
and RV 'all the earth'). This redundancy is 
found in various forms in old Eng., as 'the whole 
all,' 'the all whole,' 'all and whole.' For all: 
Jn21" 'for all ( = notwithstanding) there were so 
many.' Cf. Tindale's tr. of Ac 16" ' for all that 
we are Romans.' Once for all: He 10'° (Gr. 
itpdToi) ; this is the only occurrence in AV, and it 
gives for all in ital. ; but RV, which omits the 
italics here, gives the same tr. of this adv. in He 
7" 9»», Jude \ and in marg. of Ro 6>». In 1 Co 15« 
it is tr. • at once ' in both VSS. Ail to brake : Jg 
9** 'And a certain -woman cast a piece of a mill- 
stone upon Abimelech's head, and all to brake 
(RV 'and brake') his skull.' This is the most 
interesting of those phrases in which the word 'all' 
i>f found. The meaning is not, ' and all in order to 
break his skull ' ; the verb is in the past tense. 
The ' to' is not the sign of the infin., it goes with 
the verb, like the Ger. zer, to signify asunder, or 
in pieces. So we find to-burst, to-cut, to-rend, to- 
rive, etc. ' All ' was prefixed to this emphatic verb 
to give it greater emphasis. Hence ' all to-brake ' 
means 'altogether broke in pieces.' Cf. Tindale's 
tr. of Mt 7* ' lest they tread them under their feet, 
and the other turn again, and all to rent you.' Sir 
T. More says (Works, 1557, p. 1224) 'She fel in 
hand with hym . . . and all to rated him.' 

J. Hastings. 
ALLAMMELECH (ti^s^n).— Perhaps ' King's oak,' 
a town of Asher probably near Acco (Jos 19-^). The 
site is not known. 

ALLAR (B 'AWdp, A 'AXdp, AV Aalar), 1 Es 5^. 
— One of the leaders of those Jews who could not 
show their pedigree as Isr. at the return from 
captivity unaer Zerubbabel. The name seems to 
correspond to Immer in Ezr 2^®, Neh 7*S one of the 
places from which these Jews returned. In 1 Es 
Cherub, Addan, and Immer appear as ' Cbaraatha- 
lan leading them and Allar.' 

H. St. J. Thackeray. 

ALLAY, not found in AV, is introduced by RV 
into Ec 10* 'yielding allayeth (AV 'pacifieth') 
great offences.' The meaning seems to be that a 
spirit of conciliation puts an end to offences more 
completely than a strong arm. Cf . Shaks. 2 Henry 
VI. IV. i. 60, 'allay this thy abortive pride.' 

J. Hastings. 

ALLEGE occurs but twice. Wis 18^ 'a*"* 
{u-jrofi.irfi<rai, RV ' bringing to remembrance ') the oaths 
and covenants made with the fathers' ; and Ac 17' 
'Opening and a'ns that Christ must needs have 
sullered,' where it has the old meaning of adducing 
proofs (vafxiTidififyos), like Lat. allegare, not the 
mod. sense of asserting. Allegiance, not in AV, is 
given in RV at 1 Ch 12'^ as tr. of n-n-^o ' Kept their 
a. to (AV ' Kept the ward of ') the house of Saul.' 

J. Hastings. 

ALLEGORY. — i. History of the Word.— 
The substantive iiKX-rtyopla, with its verb dWi/^opfi/w, 
is derived from dXXo, something else, and iyopevo), 
I speak ; and is defined by Heraclitus (Heraclides ?) 
— probably of the first century A.D. — as follows : 
dXXa (tip iyoptijui' rp&iroi irepa 5# uv X^7«t arj/jiaivtov 
iirotvOfUi)^ d\\riyopia KaXtirau : ' The mode of speech 
which says other things (than tlie more letter) and 
hints at different things from what it expresses, 
is called appropriately nllegori/' (c. 5). Neither 
substantive nor verb is found in the LXX ; and 
the verb alone, and that only once (Gal 4**), occurs 
in the NT. The word, wiiether substantive or 
verb, appears to be altogether late Greek. Plutarch 
(flourished 80-120 A.D.) tells as (De Aud. Poet. 19 

E) that it was the equivalent in his day for the 
more old-fashioned iiirbvoia, the deeper sense (or the 
figure expressing it), which was a special feature 
in the Stoic philosophy, with its Oepairtla {treatment, 
manipulation) ; and Cicero had not long before 
introduced iWriyopla, in its Greek form, in two or 
three pas.sages in his works {e.g. Orator 27 ; Ad 
Attic, ii. 20); while Philo had freely used sub- 
stantive and verb early in the lirst century ; and 
the verb is used in Josephus {Ant. Prooem. 4) of 
some of the writings of Moses. 

ii. Distinctive Meaning.— The provinces of 
alle<jory, type, symbol, parable, fable, metaphor, 
analogy, mysterv, may all trench upon one 
another ; but each has its speciality, and the same 
thing can only receive the different names as it is 
viewed from the different points. Allegory differs 
essentially from type in that it is not a premonition 
of future development, and that there is no neces- 
sary historical and real correspondence in the main 
idea of the original to the new application of it : 
from symbol, in that it is not a lower grade natur- 
ally shadowing forth a higher ; from parable, in 
that it is not a picture of a single compact truth, 
but a transparency through which the different 
details are seen as different truths, and in that it 
is not necessarily ethical in its aim ; from fable, 
in that its lessons are not confined to the sphere of 
practical worldly prudence ; from metaphor, in 
that its interpretation is not immediate and 
obvious, but has to be sought out through the 
medium of verbal or phenomenal parallels ; from 
analogy, because it is not addressed to the reason 
so much as to the imagination ; and from mystery, 
in that it does not await a new order of things to 
be specially manifested and truly discerned. All 
these tropes may indeed be classed under the 
allegorical or the figurative, so far as they all 
point to a sense different from that contained in 
the mere letter. But, conventionally and in 
practice, allegory has a sphere of its own. In the 
non-specific sense, it has to do with the general 
relations of life in its external resemblances, one 
thing being mirrored in another according to out- 
ward appearance, so that the appearance of the 
one can serve as the figure of the other. In other 
words, the thing put before the eye or ear repre- 
sents, not itself, out something else in some way 
like it. Thus the fish was early used as an allegory 
of Christ ; it was not, strictly speaking, a symbol, 
or a type, or a parable, or any of the figures above 
compared. The resemblance was both far-fetched 
and outward, being evolved from the several letters 
of the word ^x^"^^ ^is the initials of 'Itjo-oOs, XpiarSs, 
Qeov, Tl6s, lurrip. Of allegory proper, more or less 
elaborated, we have within the bounds of the 
sacred books very little. In the OT may be 
instanced the allegory of the Vine in the 80th 
Psalm, and in the NT those of the Door, the 
Shepherd (Jn 10), and the Vine (Jn 15). In the 
more confined, the technical and historical sense, it 
denoted, especially for Alexandrian Greeks and 
Jews, the system of interpretation by which the 
most ancient Greek literature, in the one case, and 
the OT writings (and subsequently the NT), in 
the other, were assigned their value in proportion 
as they meant, not what they said, but something 
else, and could be made the clothing of cosmo- 
logical, philosophical, moral, or religious ideas. 
This leaas us to the third and final division. 

iii. Allkgoricai, Interpkp:tation. — The ten- 
dency to allegorize has its foundations in human 
nature. Constantly and unconsciously We read 
into the creations of other men, as, for example, 
into a painting or a poem, our own thoughts, con- 
ceptions, and emotions, and are scarcely to be 
persuaded that they were not the original thoughts, 
conceptions, and emotions of the creator. Or, 




again, when any literature has so deeply inwrought 
itself into the hearts and lives of a people as to have 
become a sacred and inseparable constituent of 
their nature, and when time has nevertheless so 
far changed the current of thought as to make 
that literature apparently inconsistent with the 
new idea, or inaaequate to express it, — then the 
choice for the people lies between a ruinous breach 
■with what is, by this time, part and parcel of 
themselves, and, on the other hand, forcing the 
old language to be a vehicle for the new thought. 
Hence the tendency to allegory, which is indigenous 
to human nature, becomes, in the absence of his- 
torical criticism, also inevitable, except to the 
indifferent iconoclast, if such there be. Allegory 
proved the safety-valve for Greek, Jew, and 
Christian. During and, perhaps, owing to the in- 
tellectual movement of the fifth century B.C., — in 
spite of the severe critical deprecation of Plato, 
whose mind was set on higher things, — Homer, 
the ' Bible of the Greeks,' was saved for the 
educated by allegory ; with the stories he told of 
the gods, it he was not allegorical, he was impious, 
or thev were immoral. Hence, from Anaxagoras 
onwards, the actions of the Homeric gods and 
heroes are allegories of the forces of nature ; and, 
in Heraclitus (first century A.D.), the ' story of Ares 
and Aphrodite and Hephaestus is a picture of iron 
subdued by fire, and restored to its original hard- 
ness by Poseidon, that is, by water.' Or else they 
are the movements of mental powers and moral 
virtues ; and so, in Comutns (also first cent. A.D.), 
when Odysseus filled his ears that he might be 
deaf to the song of the Sirens, it is an allegory of 
the righteous filling their senses and powers of 
mind with divine words and actions that the 
passions and pleasures which tempt all men on the 
sea of life might knock at their doors in vain 
(Hatch, Hibbert Lectures, 1888, pp. 62, 64). 

But allegorizing was Jewish as well as Greek, and 
Palestinian as well as Hellenistic. Both sections 
of Jews used allegory for apologetic purposes, 
but not with identical aims. The Pal. Jews 
allegorized the OT, finding a hidden sense in 
sentences, words, letters, and (in the centuries 
after Christ) even vowel-points, in order to 
satisfy their consciences for the non-observance 
of laws that had become impracticable, or to 
justify traditional and often trivial increment, or 
to defend God against apparent inconsistency, or 
the writers or historical characters against impiety 
or immorality ; or, generally, for homUetical pur- 
poses. Thus Akiba (first and second centuries A.D. ) 
claimed to have saved bv allegory the Son^ of 
Songs from rejection. Allegory was a consider- 
able element in the Pal. Haggada (or inter- 
pretation), and there were definite canons regu- 
lating its use. The Hellenistic Jews, whose 
metropolis of culture was Alexandria, and who, 
in the neighbourhood of NT times, constituted 
the majority of Jews, directed their apologetic 
towards educated Greeks, for philosophical pur- 
poses, and allegorized the OT to prove that tneir 
sacred books were neither barbarous nor immoral 
nor impious, that their religion had the same 
rationale as Greek phOosophy, and that Moses had 
been the teacher, or, at all events, the anticipator, 
of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. 
The iSellenistic thinkers desired to be Greek philo- 
sophers without ceasing to be Jewish religionists. 
Thus the Alexandrian Aristobulus (second cent. 
B.C.), reputed to be the earliest known Hellenistic 
allegorizer, in his commentary on the Pent, ad- 
dressed to Ptolemy Philometor, sought (as Clement 
of Alexandria says) to 'bring Peripatetic philo- 
sophy out of Moses and the Prophets.' But the 
representative Alexandrian allegorizer was Philo 
(early in first century A.D.) : he reduced allegory to 
VOL. I. — 5 

a system of his own, with canons similar to those 
of the Pal. Haggadists, but freely used, and 
adapted to philosophical ends by means of the 
Platonic doctrine of ideas. Professing to retain 
the literal sense as carrying in itself moral teach- 
ing, he nevertheless matie the allegorical so tran- 
scendently significant (as the soul in the body) that 
both literal and moral were continually over- 
whelmed : before the writer's determination to 
extract the allegorical at aU costs and in any sense 
that at the time suited his mood, the facts often 
disappeared, the narrative was turned upside down, 
and, in the handling of the characters of OT 
story, the unities were entirely ignored. So, when 
it is said that Jacob took a stone for his pillow, 
what he did, as the archetype of a self -disciplining 
soul, was to put one of the incorporeal intelligences 
of that holy ground close to his mind ; and, under 
the pretext of going to sleep, he, in reality, found 
repose in the intelligence which he had chosen that 
on it he might lay the burden of his life. Again, 
Joseph is made, in one aspect, the tvpe of the 
sensual mind, and, in another, of a' conqueror 
victorious over pleasure. 

We find the Alexandrian method employed upon 
the OT as early as the Book of Wisdom and its 
aU^orical interpretation of the manna in the 
Pent, (le^""-), and of the high priest's robe as the 
image of the whole world (18**). 

The early Christians therefore found this current 
and acknowledged method of interpretation to their 
hand in the arguments they drew from the OT 
against the unbelieving Jews ; and, in particular, 
St. Paul and the Paulinists, in their efforts to 
turn the law itself against the law-worshipping 
Judaisers. But not till post-apostolic times, cul- 
minating in the times of Clement of Alexandria 
and Origen, does the allegorical method show itself 
in any luxuriance. The method of Jesus and the 
speakers and writers in NT is typical rather 
than allegorical, and Palestinian rather than Alex- 
andrian ; and, in any case, is self -restrained and 
free from the characteristic extravagance of rabbi 
and philosopher. St. Paul, in his application of 
the method to the command as to oxen threshing 
(1 Co 99^), to the rock (1 Co 10*), and to the veil of 
Moses (2 Co 3^**^-), is both Palestinian and Alex- 
andrian in disregarding the original drift of the 
passages and incidents, treating it as nothing 
(1 Co 9*') in comparison with the typico-allegorical 
interpretation ; but he is Pal. in bemg homiletical 
in Im aim and not philosophical, and in having 
persons and events in his perspective rather than 
abstract truth. In Gal 4^- he openly affirms that 
Hagar and Sarah, Ishmael and Isaac, itrrlw dXX^- 
yopovfiera, i.e. are (1) spoken or written of in the 
Scriptures allegorically, or (2) interpreted allegori- 
cally (with his approval) in his o^\ti day ; and, in 
treating them (somewhat after Philo's manner 
upon the same subject) as representing two dilierent 
covenants, one of the present and the other of the 
future Jerusalem, he approximates to the Alex- 
andrian philosopliical practice of allegorizing con- 
crete things, persons, and events into abstract 
ideas : but only approximates ; for not only is he 
clearly historical and typical in his basis, and 
homiletical in his aim, but, if ffwrr<Kx«t refers (as 
some think) to the numerical value of the letters 
according to the Rabbinic Gematria, he is, even 
here, Padestinian rather than Alexandrian in his 
method of interpretation. In the £p. to the Hebreics 
the influence of Philo and Alexandria comes out 
more definitely. The writer is an ' idealist whose 
heaven is the home of all transcendental realities, 
whose earth is fuU of their symbols, and these are 
most abundant where earth is most sacred — in the 
temple (or tabernacle) and worship of his people.' 
He IS Alexandrian in his frequent contrasts between 




the invisible (11'), imperishable (S" 9*» 12*8), arche- 
typal world (8'^), and the visible (11^), perishable 
(12-"^) world of appearance (11*), the imperfect copy 
{vrdSetyna) of the former (9** 8") ; or, a^ain, between 
Judaism as the shadow (<r»cio) and Christianity as 
the nearest earthly approximation («/»cu'v) to the 
heavenly substance (rd iirovpdvia) (8* 10') ; and the 
allejjioi-y of Melchizedek, based not on the historical 
personage so much as on the nature of the two 
passing allusions to him, combined with the signifi- 
cance of the great silence elsewhere in the OT 
as to his birth and descent, as well as of the two 
names Melchizedek and Salem, — all these together 
being made the foundation of a logical construction 
of the person and work of Christ as an embodiment 
of the preconceived idea, — can hardly be considered 
without regard to Philo's treatment of Melchizedek 
as an allegory of his apparently impersonal Logos. 
And yet, with the expression in the 1 10th Psalm be- 
fore us, ' Thou art a priest for ever after the order 
of Melchizedek,' Me must allow Dr. Westcott a 
certain margin of justification when he maintains 
that the treatment of Melchizedek is tj'pical rather 
than allegorical ; though he api)ears to be too 
sAveeping when he afiirms, ' There is no allegory in 
this epistle.' J. MasSIE. 

ALLEMETH (nr^y), AV Alemeth, 1 Ch Q^ ; 
Almon (jis^i*), Jos 21"*. — A Levitical city of Ben- 
jamin. It is noticed with Anathoth, and is the 
present 'Almit on the hills N. of Anathoth. SWP 
vol. iii. sheet xvii. C. K. Conder. 

ALLIANCE.— The attitude of the Israelites to 
foreign nations varied great Ij' at different periods 
in their history. In early times alliances were 
entered into and treaties concluded without the 
-li:;liii-t scruple. Even intermixture with alien 
r.H c^ was so far from being tabooed, that it was 
one of the principal means by Avhich the land west 
of the Jordan was secured. Thus we are told that 
Judah married and had children by the daughter of 
a Canaanite (Gn 38'-), the tradition embodying the 
history of the clan in a personal narrative. Again, 
the condemnation of Simeon and Levi (Gn 34*') is 
evidently due to the violation of a treaty previously 
entered into with Shechem (cf. the story of the 
Gibeonites, Jos 9^, 2 S 21>). 

For the earliest period, then, it may be held that 
treaties with Canaanitish clans were frequent 
and general. On the other hand, they played 
an important part in the internal history of the 
Hebrews. Israel was by no means at first so 
homogeneous as is often supposed ; the tribes, 
practically independent of each other, were gradu- 
ally knit together by circumstances. Common 
dangers led to common action on the part of two or 
more of them : the leaders conferrecl together, or 
the chief of the strongest clan, or of the one most 
immediately threatened, assumed the headship, 
and the way was prepared for a close confetleration. 
The times of the Judges furnish ample evidence of 
this, and the monarchy had no other foundation. 
A very curious alliance, and one that proves lx)th 
the looseness of the Heb. confederacy and the 
reatliness with which relations were entered into 
with foreigners, is that between David and Achish, 
king of Gath (1 S 27^^). Under it, David was pre- 
pared to fight, on behalf of the traditional enemies 
of his race, against the lienjamite kingdom of Saul. 
That he did not. was npitarently due solely to the 
suspicions of his fidelity entertained by tlie lords 
of tlie Philistines. 

When the monarchy became settled and com- 
paratively |X)werful under Solomon, treaties with 
foreigners, in the stricter sense, became frequent. 
Solomon himself formed an alliance with Hiram, 
king of Tyre (1 K 5), and it is most i)rol)able that 

some of his marriages, and especially that with the 
daughter of Pharaoh, cemented a iwlitical union. 
The frequency with which rebels and outlaws 
sought a refuge in Egyjtt made such a union 
desirable. On the other hand, the memorials of 
the capture of Jems, by^ Shishak of Egypt disprove 
the conjecture that his attack on Ilehoboam was 
made in support of Jeroboam. After the secession 
of the ten tribes, Israel and Judah both sought 
foreign assistance against each other. Asa, on being 
attacked by IJaasha, bribed Benhadad of Syria to 
dissolve the alliance he had previously formed with 
Israel, and to join him in his war with that country. 
It was not until the reigns of Jehoshaphat and 
Ahab that the two countries found themselves in 
accord, and fought side by side against the heathen. 
Their union was, of course, purely political : it had 
nothing to do with religious or sentimental con- 
siderations. Ahab could also form, or maintain, 
an alliance with the king of Phoinicia, and build 
an altar to Baal as the guardian and avenger of 
the treaty (1 K l&^). With the entrance of the 
Assyrians on the scene, a new series of alliances is 
begun. Jehu's tribute to Shalmaneser was that of 
a vassal rather than an ally, and Menahem seems 
to have bribed Tiglath-pileser to aid him against 
his own subjects (2 K 15"*). At this point, how- 
ever, the prophets begin to inveigh against these 
alliances (cf. especially Hos 8*, Is 30'*), and the 
national exclusiveness is finally perfected by Ezra 
and his school. J. MiLLAR. 

ALLIED (Neh 13* only) has the special meaning 
of connected by marriage. So Rob. of Glouc. — 

' And saide, that it was to h.\Tn great prow and honour 
To be in such mariage olied to the emperour.' 

J. Hasting.?. 
ALLON. — 1. (B 'AXXtir, A 'AbXwv, AV AUom), 
1 Es 5^. — His descendants are the last named 
among the children of Solomon's servants who 
returned with Zembbabel. He may be the same 
as Ami ('ok 'H/iei), the last named in the parallel 
list in Ezr 2''', or Amon (pax 'H/ifi/i), Neh 1^ ; 
but the eight preceding names in 1 Es have no 
parallels in the canonical books, so that the 
identification is doubtful. Fritzsche conjectures 
viol &X\u)v, meaning 'etc.' 2. A Simeonite prince, 
1 Ch 4a7. H. St. J. Thackehay. 

ALLON BACUTH (niD? jiVx, AV A. Bachuth, 
'oak of Meeping'), where Deborah, Bel)ekah'8 
nurse, was buried, was at Bethel (Gn 35"). See 
Bethel, Oak. C. R. Coxder. 

ALLOW. — Two distinct Lat. words, allaudare, 
to praise, approve, and allocare, to place (the 
latter through the French aloucr), assumed in 
Eng. the same form 'allow.' Consequently in the 
five occurrences of this word in AV there are two 
distinct meanings. 1. To approve : Ro 7" ' For 
that which I do, I a. not ' (Gr. yii'uaKU). lience RV 
'know not'); Ro 14-"- 'Happy is lie that con- 
demneth not himself in that thing which he 
aoth' (RV ' appro veth ') ; 1 Th 2^: and Lk 11« 
'Ye* a. the deeds (RV 'consent unto the works') 
of your fathers.' Cf. Ps IP Pr. Bk. 'The Lord 
aoth (AV and RV 'trieth') the righteous.' 2. 
To place before one so as to see and admit it, to 
acknowledge, accept: Ac 24" 'Which they them- 
selves also a.' (Gr. wpoaSixofLai, RV 'look Jor,' m. 
'accept'). Allowable (not in AV or RV) is found 
in Pref. of AV=' Mortliy of approval.' Allowance 
is also in Pref. AV=approval, and has been intro- 
duced by RV at Jer 52^* in the mod. sense of 
' portion ' ( AV ' diet '). Cf . 1 Es V. 

ALMIGHTY is used in OT as tr. of ^ 48 times 
(all the occurrences of that word) of wli. 31 are 




in Job. In NT it is nsed as tr. of wavroKpirup 10 
times (all the occurrences of tliat word), of wh. 9 
are in Rev, It is also freq. in Apocr. See God. 

J. Hastings. 

AL MODAD (Tiic^N), the first-named son of 
.Foktan, Gn 10-«, 1 Ch 1=». The context seems to 
imply that some tribe or district of S. Arabia is 
meant, but the name lias not hitherto been identi- 
fied Avith certainty. The first element has been 
variously explained as the Arab, article {this is 
perhaps intended by the Massoretic punctuation ; 
so Dillmann on Gn 10-'"), as the Sem. £1 (' God ' ; so 
Halevy), and as the Arab, dl ('family' ; so Glaser, 
Skizze, ii. 425). The second element seems clearly 
to be a derivative of the verb wadd (to love), of the 
sam'e stem as the name Wadd, a god of the 
Mina?ans and other Arabian races. As a word 
that can be read Maudad is applied in inscriptions 
to the Gebanites in their relation to the kings of 
Main, Glaser suggests that the name should be 
rendered 'the family to whom the office of Maudad,' 
i.e. some priesthood of Wadd, ' was assigned,' and 
tliat the tribe should be identified with the 
Gebanites, whom he places in the S.W. corner of 
Arabia. Others have supposed the word to be 
con'upt, and have corrected it Al-Murad, the well- 
known name of a tribe of Yemen. 

D. S. Margoliouth. 

ALMON. — See Allemeth. 

ALMON-DIBLATHAIM (ns;p^?T|=H', Nu 33^8- "7). 
— A station in the iourneyings, prob. identical with 
Beth-diblathaim, Jer 48-^. The meaning of the 
word Diblathaim is a double cake of figs ; its 
application to a town may indicate the appear- 
ance of the ]}lace or neighbourhood. Conder 
suggests ' two discs ' with reference to some altar- 
stone or dolmen (cf. Heth and Moah, p. 262). 

A. T. Chapman. 

ALMOND (ip^ shdked). Shdkcd is, like many 
names of plants, used for both the plant and its 
fruit. Thus in Ec 12^ and Jer 1^^, the reference is 
to the tree, whUe in Gn 43", Ex 25^3. »4 3719.20^ 
Nu 17*, the reference is to the fruit. The Arab, 
name for the almond is lauz. The same word 
occurs once in OT (Gn 30^"), where it is Avrongly 
translated in AV Hazel. The Heb. equivalent, 
n'?, is undoubtedly another name for the almond, 
probably the more ancient one. 

The almond, Amygdahts commtinis, L., belongs 
to the order Rosacea^, tribe Amygdalese, and is 
a tree with an oblong or splierical comus, from 
fifteen to thirty feet high. The branches are 
somewhat straggling, especially in the wild state. 
The leaves are lanceolate, serrate, acute, three to 
four inclies long, and most of them fall during the 
winter. About midwinter the bare tree is suddenly 
covered with blossoms, an inch to an inch and a 
half broad. Although the petals are pale pink 
toward tlieir base, they are usually whitish toward 
their tips, and the general efiect of an almond tree 
in blossom is white. As there are no leaves on the 
tree when the blossoms come out, the whole tree 
appears a mass of white, and the effect of a large 
number of them, interspersed among the dark- 
green foliage and golden fruit of the lemon and 
orange, and the feathery tops of the palms, is to give 
an indescribable charm to the Januaiy and Febru- 
ary landscapes in the orchards of the large cities 
of Pal. and Syria. Soon after blossoming, the 
delicate petals begin to fall in soft, snoAvy showers 
on the ground under and around the trees, and 
their place is taken by the young fruit ; and, at the 
same time, the young leaves begin to open, and 
the tree is covered with foliage in March. The 
young fruit consists of an oblong, flattened, downy 
Dod, which often attains a length of two and a 
lalf to three inches, and a thickness of two-thirds 


of an inch. This pod is called in Arab, kur'aun- 
el-lauz, and just before ripening it has a crisp, 
cucumber-like consistence, and a pleasant acid 
taste, which are greatly liked by the people. 
It is hawked about the streets during the months 
of April and May, and eaten with great relish, 
especially by children. At this stage the shell 
of the nut is yet soft, and the kernel juicy, 
with a slight smack of peach - stone flavour. 
Very soon, however, the succulent flesh of the 
outer envelope loses its juice, and dries around the 
hardening shell, to which it forms a shrunken, 
leathery envelope. The kernel acquires firmness, 
and in early summer the nut is ripe. It is then 
from an inch to an inch and a half long. Almonds 
are, and always have been, a favourite luxury of 
the Orientals (Gn 43^^). They make a delicious 
confection of the hulled kernels, by beating them 
into a paste with sugar in a mortar. This paste, 
moulded into various shapes, is called hariset-el- 
laicz. The half kernels are spread over several 
sorts of blancmange, called mahallibiyeh, and 
nashawiyeh, and rmighli. Almonds are also 
sugared as with us. 

There are several species of wild almond in Pal. 
and Syria. (1) The wild state of Amygdalus com- 
munis, L., a stunted tree, with smaller blossoms 
and pods, and small bitter nuts. Some of the 
varieties of this have leaves less than an inch long. 
(2) A. Orientalis, Ait., a shrub w^ith spinescent 
branches, small silvery leaves, and bitter nuts, 
three-quarters of an inch long. (3) A. lycioides, 
Spach, a shrub with intricate, stiff, spiny branches, 
linear-lanceolate, green leaves, and a bitter nut 
half an inch long. (4) A. spartioides, Spach, a 
shrub with few linear-lanceolate leaves, and bitter 
nuts, a little over half an inch long. All of these 
share more or less the peculiarities of flowering 
and fruiting which belong to the cultivated al- 

The Heb. word for almond signifies the 'waker,' 
in allusion to its being the first tree to wake to life 
in the winter. The word also contains the signifi- 
cation of 'watching' and 'hastening.' In Jer 1" 
the word for ' almond tree ' is shdkcd, and the w^ord 
for 'I will hasten' (v.^-), shdked, from the same 
root. The almond was the emblem of the divine 
forwardness in bringing God's promises to pass. 
A similar instance in the name of another rosa- 
ceous plant is the apricot, which was named from 
prcecocia {early) on account of its blossoms appear- 
ing early in the spring, and its fruit ripening 
earlier than its congener the peach (Pliny, xv. 11). 

The usual interpretation or Ec 12' ' the almond 
tree shall flourish,' is that the old man's hair shall 
turn white like the almond tree. To this Gesenius 
objects, that the blossom of the almond is pink, not 
white. He prefers to translate the Avord for 
flourish by spurn or reject, making the old man 
reject the almond because he has no teeth to eat it. 
But this objection has no force. The pink colour 
of the almond blossom is very light, usually mainly 
at the base of the petals, and fades as they open, 
and the general eftect of the tree as seen at a dis- 
tance is snowy-white. The state of the teeth has 
already been alluded to (v.^), ' and the grinders 
cease because they are few,' and ' the sound of 
the grinding is low.' We m&j therefore retain 
the beautiful imagery which brings to mind the 
silver hair of the aged, and drav,r from the snoAvy 
blossom the promise of the coming fruit. 

G. E. Post. 

ALMSGIVING.— i. Th^ History of the Word.— 
This is interesting and instructive. The Gr. Avord 
f\e7]fxo(TvvTj, from AA'hich ahns is derived, is one of 
those Avords which owe their origin to the use of 
the Gr. language by Jcavs imbued Avith the religious 
and ethical ideas o"f OT. The LXX (including the 




Apocr. ) supplies the greatest variety of examples 
or the senses given to it. In some passages it 
appears impossible to distinguish its meaning from 
that of eXeot ; but eXerifioffvvr), as derived from the 
adi. iXei^fiuy, which describes a merciful man, who 
is himself as it were a concrete example of mercy, 
properly denotes the exliibition of the quality, 
rather than the inward feeling. It is used of God 
both in the sing. (Is l''" 28", Sir 17^, Bar i^) and 
in plur. [Ps 103 (Sept 102) «, To 3="]. A deep sense 
that God's goodness had l)een and would be proved 
in deeds, is specially characteristic of revealed 
religion ; and the need for expressing this may, in 
part at least, have been the motive for coining the 
unclassical term which we are considering. It is 
used of men, also, to signify (1) the showing of 
kindness, the practice of works of mercy (Gn 41^, 
Pr 19*" 20» 21", Sir 7^° etc.); and (2) particular 
works of mercy (Pr 3», Dn 4« [Eng, 4^1 Sir 35^ 
[Sept. 32*], To P- " etc. ). By the time at least that 
the books of Sir and To were ^vritten, it had come to 
be a quite specilic description of deeds of compassion 
to the poor. The importance which this class of 
actions had acquired for religious minds is thus 
marked by the adoption of a special word to denote 
them. The LXX, however, does not supply any 
clear instance of the transference of the word to 
the actual gifts bestowed. 

The LXX employs it as an equivalent not only for 
npn (mercy), but sometimes for words denoting; right- 
eousneas, pnif, ■^i57S, nij-iv (Dn 4^). The thought may 
suggest itself that we have here signs of a tendency 
to regard A., after the manner of the Talm., as the 
chief and most typical of the works whereby that 
righteousness may be acquired which makes man 
acceptable with God. But this is more than 
doubtful. It occurs several times where righteous- 
ness is predicated of God (Is 1^ 28" 59^^). In one or 
more or the following passages, where words for 
righteousness are tr. m LXX by iXerjfjLoavvri, a 
human quality may be in view ( Ps 33 [Sept. 32] ', 
Dt 6=» 24i», Ps 24 [Sept. 23]"). But in each case 
a ditterent interpretation, at least of the LXX, is 
possible. The conception of righteousness in OT 
IS a large one, and not wholly definite. Under one 
aspect it wears almost the character of mercy. 
And it may have been from a more or less clear 
consciousness of this that the renderings just re- 
ferred to were adopted. Neither in the Apocr. 
nor in the LXX or the canon, books do there 
appear to be examples of the use of SiKaioff^ivr} 
for ' alm.s^ving,' tnough it is true that eXeri- 
Ho<j6vt] ana biKaioaivr) are coupled at To 2^* 12*- * 
in a manner which shows a strong association 
of ideas between them. We have, however, an 
indication of this Rabbinic usage in the best 
supported reading of Mt 6^ 

In NT the word is used in Mt and Lk and in Ac, 
but always in the sense either of A. or of alms — 
the actual gift (for the latter see Ac 3" ^). 

The Lat. Fathers, from Tertullian and Cyprian 
onwards, and the Old Lat. and Vulg. VSS employ 
the word eleemosyna, transliterated from the Gr. ; 
only, however, in those cases where they had no 
exact or convenient Lat. equivalent, trom Lat. 
eccles. usage come the various derivatives in the 
languages of modem Ihirope (Eng. alms, Fr. 
aumdne. Germ. Almosen, Ttal. limosina). 

ii. Jewish Teaching. — Some consideration of this 
is necessary, if we would rightly aj)preciate the 
teaching of NT on the subject. Evidence of the 
importance which A. had acquired for religious 
minds among the Jews of the 2nd or 3rd cent. n.c. 
has already come before us in the fact that a 
special name was assigned to this class of actions. 
They had become one of the common and acknow- 
ledged observances of the religious life, a matter to 
be attended to by the religious man in the same 

regular and careful manner as prayer and fasting, 
with which we find A. joined (see To 12*, Sir V", 
and cf. the conduct of the earnest proselyte Cor- 
nelius, Ac 10^-*). It is regarded as a specially 
efficacious means of making atonement for sin 
(Sir 3"-** IG'*), and obtaining divine protection 
from calamity (Sir 29^" 40^, To 14'"- ") ; the merit 
thereof is an imfailing possession (Sir 40") ; the 
religious reputation to be won thereby is held out 
as an inducement to the practice of it (Sir 31 [LXX 

Such features in the estimate of A. are, if possible, 
still more marked in the Talm., where npis, righteous- 
ness, is a recognised name for A. Tlie perform- 
ance of works of mercy is set forth as a means 
whereby man may be accounted righteous in the 
sight or God, like the fulfilment of the command- 
ments of the Law. It is even more meritorious 
than the latter, because it is not exactly prescribed, 
but left, as to its extent and amount at least, to 
the individual. It must not, however, be supposed 
that all the Rabbinic teaching on A. tends to self- 
righteousness. It has a tetter side. The superiority 
of those deeds of kindness in which personal sym- 
pathy is shown, and which involve the taking of 
trouble, over the mere bestowal of gifts, is clearly 
insisted on, and there are sayings which strikingly 
enjoin consideration for the self-respect of the 
recipients of bounty. (See F. Weber, System d. 
altsynaqogalen PaldstiniscJien Theologie, p. 273 f., 
and A. \Vunsche, Neue Bcitr. z. Erldut. d. Evang. 
a^ts Talmud u. Midrasch, on Mt 6^"*, Lk li*' 


iii. The Teaching of the NT. — In the Sermon on 
the Mount (as recorded in Mt), our Lord, after 
setting forth His New Law as a true fulfilment of 
the Ancient Law (5^'''**), proceeds to treat of certain 
chief religious observances from a similar point of 
view (6^"^°) ; and, in full accordance with the Je\\'i3h 
thought of the time, that one which He takes first is 
A. It may seem strange that He does not more 
directly correct the erroneous notions of merit and 
justification which had already become associated, 
in more or less definite form, with such works ; and 
that He speaks of a divine reward for them without 
adding any warning against misunderstanding. He 
contents Himself Avith requiring purity of motive, 
indifterence to and even avoidance of human praise, 
and self-forgetfulness. But, in truth, if we learn 
to test the quality of the motive for, and the 
manner of performing, each deed, with reference 
only to the judgment which God will pronounce 
upon it, that temper of mind, that faith and 
humility and sense of personal failure and sin, 
which alone are consistent with the principles of 
the gospel, will be secured. Another very signifi- 
cant saying of our Lord on A. is given Lk 11*^ He 
there enjoins it as the true means of purifying 
material objects for our use ; it is a counterpart to 
the ceremonial washings of the Pharisees. Lk 12^* 
is the only other passage in the Gospels where the 
word fXerifiocr^vr) is used. But liberality in giving is 
frequently inculcated or commended (Mt 5*^ I9f^^, 
Mk 10", Lk 630- =» 14" 16^ 18^). In the Acts the 
Jewish use of the term is illustrated ; it does not 
occur there in any Christian precept. But that 
feature of the life of the Christian community at 
Jerus. in the first days, as there pictured, which 
has been called communism, is more properly an 
example of abounding charity. 

In Christendom during many centuries the duty of 
A. (primarily, no doubt, from a desire of obeying the 
commands of Christ) received great, and sometimes 
exaggerated, attention. The danger now is rather 
that, through fear of the ill-eflccts of indiscriminate 
A., the disposition to give and the habit of doing 
so should be discouraged, A practice, however, 
enjoined as this one is, must permanently hold a 




high place in the Chiistiaa rule of life. It is the 
function of modem economic and social knowledge 
only to make its exercise more wise and bene- 
ficial. V. H. Staxtox. 

ALMUG.— See Ajlgum. 

ALOES, LIGN-ALOES (irVrm 'ahdltm, m^j^ 
'ahdloth). — The word Aloes is used four times in 
the OT and once in the NT. In Nu 24« the 
Heb. word is c-STit, the LXX aKtivai, and the AV 
Lign-Aloes=Liffnum Aloes. In Ps 45* the Heb. 
is ni^nx, the LXX crajm^, and the AV Aloes. In 
Pr 7^' the Heb. is c-hn«_, the LXX rby 5i oIkov, 
and the AV Aloes. In Ca 4" the Heb. is ni^nij, 
the" LXX dXw^, and the AV Aloes (RV agrees 
with AV in all). 

It is clear that in the passages in Nu and Pr 
the LXX has followed a dilierent reading from 
the MT, and has arbitrarily translated the same 
word stacte in the Ps and aloth {aloe) in Ca. In 
face of the practical identity of the words 'ahdiim 
and 'ahdloth, it is fair to reject the various capri- 
cious renderings of the LXX, and assume that the 
word has the same meaning in all the four OT 
])assages. In the last three of these passages, 
and in the NT (Jn 19*®), the reference is plainly 
to the aromatic. 

Celsius (Hierobot. L 135) argues that this sub- 
stance is the Aquilaria Agallocha, the Lignum 
Aloes or Aloes \Vood of commerce. This wood 
was well known to the ancients, and is described 
under its Arab, name 'id in considerable detail 
by Avicenna (iL 231), in brief as follows : 'Wood 
and woody roots are brought from China and India 
and Arabia ; and some of it is dotted and blackish ; 
and it is aromatic, styptic, and slightly bitter; 
and it is covered with a leathery bark. The best 
variety is from Mandalay, and comes from the 
interior of India. The next best is that which is 
called Indian, which comes from the mountains ; 
and it has this advantage over the Mandalay 
variety, that it does not breed maggots. Some 
persons do not distinguish between the Mandalay 
and the better kinds of Indian. Among the good 
kinds of 'tic? are the Samandury, which comes from 
China on the borders of India, and the komary 
from India, and the kakilly, and the kadmury, 
and of inferior species the Hillay and the Mabitay, 
and the Lawafy and the Eabtafy. To sum up, the 
l>est'fi</is that which sinks in water, and that which 
floats is bad. It is said that the trunks and roots 
of the 'iid are buried until the woody fibre decays, 
leaving only the aromatic substance.' Aricenna 
follows this description with a detailed account of 
the medicinal and other properties of the aloes 
wood. He alludes to the wood also under the 
heading Aghaltiji, which is undoubtedly the 
a-ydWoxov of the Greeks, and the Agallochum of 
the Romans. The substance is now Imown to the 
Arabs by the names 'lid-es-saltb, 'ud-en-nadd, 
'lud-el-bakhiir, and el- iid-el-komuri. 

The order Aquilariaceie supplies several trees, 
which produce commercial aloes wood. The most 
noted of these is Aquilaria Agallocha, Roxb., a 
native of Northern India, which grows to a height 
of 120 ft. Aquilaria secundaria, of China, pro- 
duces some of the varieties alluded to by Avicenna. 
It is a well-known fact that the fragrance of the 
wood of the species of Aquilaria is developed by 
decay, a process which is nastened by burying the 
wood, as above alluded to by Avicenna. "While 
we have no positive proof that the aloes wood is 
the aromatic intended by the Heb. original, there 
is no good reason why it should not be. The 
similarity of 'ah/doth to ayaWoxov is sufficient to 
establish a strong probability in its favour, and 
in the absence of any other probable candidate 

it may be received with a fair measure of 

It must be understood that the above-mentioned 
plant has no connexion philolo^cally or botani- 
cally with Excoecaria agallocha, D.C., of the order 
of Luphorbiaceae, an acrid, poisonous, non-aromatic 
plant. Nor has it anything to do with the officinal 
Aloes, of the order Liliaceae, a plant not alluded 
to in the Bible. 

There remains the difficulty of the passage in 
Nu 24* ' as gardens by the river's side, as the 
trees of lign-aloes (n'^ng) which the Lord hath 
planted, and as cedar trees (c'rw) beside the 
waters.' The LXX has rendered the word aicrivaX 
as if written c'S^k, which means tents ; but besides 
the irregularity and inconsistency of the LXX in 
the translation of the word in the other passages 
in the OT, it would be strange that, in a triple 
parallelism of the intensive and climacteric 
order, beginning with gardens and ending 
with the prince of trees, the royal cedar, the 
word tents, instead of a kind of trees, should be 
interjected. We may Hismisa this as wholly 

We have also to remember that the same names 
may be used for more than one object in nature. 
This is pointed out in detaU in our article on the 
Algum. In the Eng. name Aloe, for the plant now 
under consideration, and for the officinal Aloes, we 
have an instance of two very diflFerent plants, of 
widely diverse properties, bearing the same name. 
It is then quite possible that the tree of Numbers 
might be totally different from the aromatic sub- 
stance of the other passages. In En§. the labiate 
genus Melissa is called balm. Impattens is called 
balsam. Populus balsamifera, L., var. candicans, 
is called balm, of Gilead, a very different plant 
from the balm of Gilead of Scripture, and the 
word balm is applied to many diverse suletances. 
There is nothing, however, to prevent the supposi- 
tion that the tree of Numbers is that which pro- 
duced the substance of the other passages. It is true 
that the tree is one of tropical Arabia, India, or 
China. But Balaam's prophecy was uttered in full 
^-iew of the tropical valley of the Jordan, where 
the climate would have made it quite possible to 
cultivate these trees. There is nothing to forbid 
the idea that this and other trees not now known 
in PaL were cultivated in the then wealthy and 
populous Jordan Valley. At least twenty -five 
distinctly tropical >vild plants are indigenous in this 
valley. In describing his bride, Solomon compares 
her with a garden in which were pomegranates, 
camphire (henna), spikenard, saffron, calamus, 
cinnamon, with all kinds of frankincense, myrrh, 
and all the chief spices (Ca 4^ ^*). Balaam might 
have looked over such a plantation when he made 
his tristich. 

On the other hand, it is not necessary to assume 
that he saw the trees to which he alludes, or that 
either he or the Israelites were familiar with them. 
In the climax he mentions the cedar, doubtless the 
cedar of Lebanon. It is unlikely that he had ever 
seen one. It is certain that the Israelites had not. 
But it was a well-known tree, and suitable for the 
comparison. The allusion to the ' cedar trees be- 
side the waters ' shows that the picture is ideal and 
poetical, as cedars grow ia dry places on the lofty 
mountain sides, and never by water-courses. The 
aloe tree might have been equally well known by 
reputation, although unfamiliar both to Balaam and 
the Israelites personally. It is quite certain that 
the spice trade was very active through the Syrian 
and Arabian deserts in ancient times, and the 
spices and aromatics therefore far more familiar 
to the people of the border lands of Pal. and Syria 
than now. So that whether the plants of Nu 
24* and Ca 4P-^* were cultivated or not, they 



were well known, and comparisons based on them 
well understood. G. E. Post. 

ALOFT is found only in 1 Es 8" ' and now is 
all Israel a.' ; RVm ' exalted,' with a ref. to Dt 28'=* 
' thou shalt be above (same Gr. word in LXX 
ix6.yw) only, and thou shalt not be beneath.' 

J. Hastings. 

ALONG.— In Jg 7" we read ' all the children of 
the east, lay a. in the valley like grasshoppers 
(liV " locusts ") for multitude," and in v.i=» ' the tent 
lay a.' The same verb ( = to fall) is used in Heb., 
and the Eng. phrase was prob. intended to have 
the same meaning in both phrases, andlang (Ger. 
entlang), at length, all the length. Cf. Jth 13*. 

J. Hastings. 

ALPHA AND OMEGA.— This phrase is found in 
Rev I" 21" 22''. In the first passage it is used of 
God the Father, in the other two of the Son. In 
the TR it wrongly appears in Rev 1". This 
phrase calls for treatment in two respects : (1) as to 
its /orw, (2) as to its menning. 

1. That the form of the phrase was familiar, or, 
at all events, easily intelligible from the outset, is 
clear from later Heb. analogies. But before we 
touch on these it is worth observing that a kindred 
idiom is found in contemporary Latin literature. 
Thus in Martial v. 26 we tind : 

Quod alpha dixi, Codre, ptenulatorum 

Te nuper, aliqua cum jocarer in charta ; 

Si forte bilem movit hic tibi versus, 

Dicas licebit Ijeta me togatorum. 
Cf. also ii. 57, and Theodoret, HE iv. 8, 7)neh fih 
ixpri<^dfxeda t<j3 d\<pa /O^XP* '''"^ <^' Amongst the later 
Jews the whole extent of a thing was often ex- 
pressed by the first and last letters of the alphabet. 
Thus (Schoettgen, Hor. Heb. in loc.) r\n was a name 
of the Shechmah, because it embraced all the 
letters. Ace. to the Jalkut Rub. fol. 17. 4 Adam 
transgressed the whole law n nyi 'no from aleph to 
tau : ace. to fol. 48. 4 Abraham observed the 
whole law from aleph to tau ; and, fol. 128. 3, 
when God blesses Israel He does it from aleph to 
ta%i (i.e. the initial and closing letters of Lv 26*"'^ in 
which the blessings on Israel are pronounced), but 
when He curses Israel He does so from vav to 
mem (see Lv 26'*"^). We may therefore reason- 
ably infer that the title ' Alpha and Omega ' is a 
Gr. rendering of a corresponding Heb. expression. 

2. The thought conveyed in this title is essenti- 
ally that of Is 44*, pinn *jxi pcKT ':k ' I am the first 
and I am the last' (cf. 41'* 43'"). The phrase thus 
signifies 'the Eternal One.' It is tlius expoimded 
by Aretas (see Cramer's Catence Grcecce in NT on 
Rev 1* : 'AX^ St6, rb ipx'h^ tlvai, 6ti Kal rb A\(pa 
ipX^ Twv ii> ypdfjifiari (ttoix^Iwv u 5tA rb tAos tuv 
airrwv. dpxv" ^^ f<*i r^Xos rli ovk &v ivvoii<roL Tb wpwroi 
<Tijfmli>e(7dcu Kal rb fffxo-roi ; 8ia roO irpurros di, rb 
Avapxoi ivvoeirai, wy koL 5tct rod ^(Tx^tov rb dreXev- 
TTp-oj, In Tertullian, Monog. 5, there is the follow- 
ing intere.sting exposition: Sic et duas Grsecia; 
litteras, summam et ultimam, sibi induit dominus, 
initii et finis concurrentium in se figuras, uti, 
quemadmodum A ad O usque volvitur et mrsus 
ad A replicatur, ita ostenderet in .se esse et initii 
decursum ad finem et finis recumiin ad initium, 
ut oninis dispo.sitio in eum desinens per quem 
coepta est, per sermonem scilicet dei qui caro 
factus est, proinde desinat quemadmmlum et 

Cf. also Cyprian, Testim. ii. 1, 6, 22; iii. 100; 

Paulinus of "Sola, Carm. 19. 645 ; 30. 89 ; Pmden- 

tius, t'athem. ix. 10-12. 
Corde natus ex Parentis, ante mundi exordium 
Alpha et O cognominatus. Ipse fons et clausula 
Omnium qute sunt fuerunt qujeque post futura 

Although in Rev 1' this title is used of Cod tlic 


Father, it seems to be confined to the Son iu 
I'atristic and subsequent literature. 

R. H. Charles. 

ALPHABET is a word derived from alpha and 
beta, the names of the first two letters in Greek, in 
which they are meaningless, being adaptations of 
the corresponding Sem. letter-names aleph, an ox, 
and beth, a house. This etymology discloses much 
of the history of the A., which originated among a 
Sem. people, by whom it Avas transmitted to the 
Greeks and by them to the Romans, whose A., 
with a few trifling modifications, we still use. 

It is now known that all the alphal)ets in the 
world, some 200 in number, are descended from a 
primitive Sem. A., usually styled the Phum. A., or 
the A. of Israel. 

The universal belief, or possibly the tradition of 
the ancient world, as reported by Plato, Tacitus, 
Plutarch, and other writers, Avas that the Phoeni- 
cians had obtained the A. from Egypt. This 
seemed so probable that after the hieroglyphic 
writing had been recovered and deciphered, repeated 
attempts were made to show how the transmission 
might have been effected. This, however, proved 
to be no easy task. At the time of the Heb. 
Exodus, the hieroglyphic picture - writing was 
already a venerable system of vast antiquity. 
Existing inscriptions make it possible to trace it 
back to the time of the 2nd dynasty, some 6(XX) 
years ago, Avhen it already appears in great 
perfection, arguing a prolonged period of ante- 
cedent development. Setting aside a multitude of 
ideographic picture - signs, there are about 400 
pictorial phonograms, or which 45 had emerged out 
of the syllabic stage, and had attained a sort of 
alphabetic character ; that is, they either denoted 
vowels, or were capable of being associated with 
more than one vowel sound. Of these, 25 were in 
more universal use than the rest, and it was mainly 
out of these, as we shall see, that the letters of the 
A. were developed. 

To a French Egyptologist, Emanuel de Rouge, 
belongs the honour of having discovered the prob- 
able method by which the Sem. A. Avas evolved out 
of the Egyp. Avriting. De Rouge pointed out that 
the immediate prototypes of the Phoen. letters 
Avere not to be found, as had been supposed, in the 
pictorial Hieroglyphs of the monuments, or in the 
Avell-knoAvn cursive Hieratic of the Middle Empire, 
but in an older and more deformed Hieratic script 
which prevailed in the time of the Early Empire, 
— a form of Avriting so ancient that it had already 
fallen into disuse before the Heb. Exodus. Thus 
obscure and difficult script is chiefly knoAvn to us 
from a single MS., now in the National Library at 
Paris. It goes by the name of the Papyrus Pnsse, 
having been presented to the Library by M. Prisse 
d' Avenues, Avho obtained it at Thebes, Avhere it 
Avas found in a tomb as old as the 11th dynasty. 
It is tlierefore older by many centuries than the 
time o^ Moses, older than, the invasion of the Shep- 
herd kings, and older probably. tbai^>%he date 
usually assigned to Abraham. 

I<^rty-five ^f tH% Egy^. IJieroglyphics had 
acquired, as we have seen, a* semi-alphabetic char- 
acter, and I>e Rouge contended that the Hieratic 
representatives of 21 of the most suitable of these 
Hieroglyphs Avere selected, and employed by 
some Sem. peojde as the prototypes of the A. they 
constructed, only one of the 22 letters being due t<> 
a non-Egyptian source. These Hieratic characters, 
traced from the Papyrus Prisse, are given in col. 2 
of the table, and the corresponding Hieroglyphs, 
Avhich face the other Avay, Avill be found in col. I. 

The oldest Sem. forms Avith which Ave are 
acquainted are shoAvn in col. 3. In comparing 
them Avith their assumed Hieratic prototypes it 
must be remembered that they are not contem- 












<■ »< 











y i 





















^ V 











1 ^ 







6 Xr-> 


























H n 







r O 

. O 
















J ' 































1^ >r 












J ) 



D 1 
















































f ^ 











? ^ 





















! + 

h » 







1. 11. 111. lY. V. 

Vl. vu. 



Col. I. Egtpttas HrEROGLTPnics, fac'mg to the left. Col. II. Hiera 
Israelite OR Ph(k>-icias Letter.s, from the Baal Lebanon and Moabite ins- 
to left, from the coins of the Satrapies and Kg>i>. inscriptions and pap\ 
from inscriptions near Jerusalem (Herodian period). Col. Xl. SijrARE 
Col. VII. Syi-ARE Hebrew, from Codex Babylonicus at St. Petersburg (91 

nc Characters, facing to 
criptions (sec. XI. to IX. B 
ri (sec. V. to L b.c.X Col 
Hebrew, from Babylonian 

L6 A.D.). CoL \1IL MODEl 

the right. 
c). CoLH". 
. V. Oldest S 

bowls (sec. 1 


Col. in. Ouftst 
.4ra31*ax. right 

QfARE Hebrew, 

\. to \1I. A.D.). 




l)oraxy forms, but are separated by at least ten, or 
more probably bv twelve centuries, a period during 
which considerable dillerences of form must almost 
necessarily have arisen, in addition to which the 
Hieratic forms are cursive, freely traced on papyrus 
with a brush, while the Sem. letters are lapidary 
types, engraved with a chisel upon stone or bronze, 
which would entail diflerences of form similar to 
those which exist Initween our printed capitals 
A, U, E and the script forms a, b, c of our modern 
handwriting. This alone would account for the 
alterations in the shapes of such letters as daleth, 
heth, resh, or viem, the change from a cursive to a 
lapidary type causing the characters to become 
more regular in size and inclination, bold curves 
being simplilied, closed ovals becoming triangles 
or squares, and the curved sweeping tails becom- 
ing straight and rigid lines. 

For 21 of the 22 Tetters of the Sem. alphabet De 
Iloug6 has found a prob. Hieratic prototype, in 18 
oases taking the normal Egyp. equivalent of the 
Sem. sound, and in 3 instances only, aleph, beth, 
and zayin, having recourse to a less usual homo- 

Ehone. In one case he fails. The peculiar guttural 
reathing denoted by the Sem. letter 'ayin did not 
exist in Egj'p. speech. For this letter no Egyp. 
prototype has been discovered, and it is supposed 
that it was an invention of the Semites, the symbol 
O being regarded, as the name suggests, as the 
picture of an ' eye.' (See No. 16, col. 3.) 

How, when, or by whom the Sem. A. was 
'thus evolved from the Egyp. Hieratic it is im- 
possible to say with precision. The possible limits 
of date are believed to lie between the 23rd and 
the 17th centuries B.C. It seems probable that the 
development was effected by some Sem. people 
who were in commercial intercourse with the 
Egyptians, — possibly, it has been conjectured, the 
Semites of S. Arabia, possibly the Hyksos, if 
these Shepherd kings were Semites, and not, as 
is now supposed, of Mongolian race, hardly the 
Hebrews, wiio seem to be excluded by the limits 
of date, but most probably a Phonn. trading 
colony settled on the shores of Lake Menzaleh in 
the Delta. On the Egyp. monuments they are 
called Fenekh (Phoenicians), and also Char or Chal, 
a name used to designate the coast tribes of Syria. 
The native land of the Char was called Kaft, 
whence part of the Delta was called Caphtor, or 
the ' greater Kaft.' If the A. arose in Caphtor 
it would easily spread to Phoenicia, and then to 
the kindred and neighbouring races. 

The art of writing must, however, have been 
known to the Hebrews at an early period of their 
history. Hiram, we are told, wrote a letter to 
Solomon, and David wrote a letter to Joab. From 
the lists of the kings and dukes of Edom, preserved 
in Gn 36 and 1 Ch I, we gather that the Edomites, 
at the time when their capital was taken by Joab 
in the reign of David, possessed state annals, going 
back to a remote period. The list of the encamp- 
ments of the Israelites in the Desert, given in 
Nu 33, cannot have been handed down by oral 
tradition ; while it is the only incorporated docu- 
ment in the Pent, which we are expressly told was 
written down by Moses, and its geogr, correctness 
has been curiou.sly confirmed by recent researches. 
The census of the congregation preserved in Nu 1-4 
and 26 is also manifestly a very ancient written 
record which has been incorporated in the text. 
All these documents were presumably written in 
the primitive Sem. A. But the discoveries of the 
last few years have led scholars to Ix^lieve that 
non-alphabetic writing of another kind was used 
in Pal. long before the Exodus, as early as the 
reign of Khu-n-Atcn, the recent excavations at 
Lachish and the discoveries at Tel el - Amama 
proving that the governors of the Syrian cities 

corresponded "with the Egyp. kings in a cursive 
form of the Babylonian cuneiform. 

The oldest known forms of the Sem. letters are 
shown in col. 3 of the table, where their names and 
their approximate phonetic values may also be found. 

Thirteen may be represented by letters in our 
own Alphabet. These are beth, gimcl, daleth, he, 
zayin, kaph, lamed, mem, nun, samekh, pe, resh, and 
tau, which correspond to our letters b, g, d, h, z, k, 
I, m, n, s, p, r, and t. The other nine letters repre- 
sent sounds which we do not exactly possess. Of 
these, two are called 'linguals,' or 'emphatics,' 
namely, teth, a gutturalised t, which is called the 
emphatic dental, and zad^., a gutturalised s, called 
the emphatic sibilant. The letter l^oph was not 
our q, but a k formed farther back in the throat, 
and here represented by k. There are also four 
' faucal breaths,' 'aleph, lie, heth, and 'ayin, of 
which 'aleph, the lightest, was a slightly explosive 
consonant, heard in English after the word No ! 
when uttered abruptly, and nearly equivalent to 
the spiritus lenis of the Greeks ; 'ayin was a sound 
of the same kind, but harder than 'aleph, approach- 
ing a g rolled in the throat ; heth, called the 
' fricative faucal,' was a continuous guttural, 
resembling the ch in the Scotch loch ; and he was a 
fainter sound of the same kind, approaching our 
h. The primitive sound of shin was probably that 
of our sh, but was subject to dialectic variation. 
Yod and vau were semi-consonants, or rather 
consonantal vowels, usually equivalent to y and v, 
but passing readily into i and u. 

None of the Sem. A.s have possessed symbols 
for the true voAvels, which are now denoted, not 
by letters, but by diacritical points, a notation 
essentially non-alphabetic, and not of any great 
antiquitv. The vowels in non-Semitic A.s, such 
as GreeK, Zend, Armenian, Georgian, Sanskrit, 
and Mongolian, have been developed out of char- 
acters representing the Sem. breaths and semi- 
consonants. Thus the Gr. alpha, whence our A, 
was obtained from 'aleph, the spiritus lenis ; 
eps^ilon, whence our E, is from he, an aspirate ; eta 
and our H from heth, the fricative faucal ; iota 
and our I and J from yod, a semi-consonant ; 
omicron and omega, and our O, from 'ayin, the 
spiritus asper ; while upsilon and our U, V, \V, Y, 
and F, came from vau, a semi-consonant. 

Besides the absence of symbols for the vowels, 
most of the Sem. scripts, Heb., Svr., and Arab., 
agree in being written from riglit to left, the 
direction following the example of the prototype, 
the Hieratic of the Papyrus Prisse, whereas in 
the non-Sem. scripts the direction has mostly 
been changed. The Sem. A.s have also adhered 
to the primitive 22 letters, none of which have 
fallen into disuse, any additional notation required 
being effected by diacritical points, whereas in other 
scripts new forms have been evolved by differentia- 
tion, as in the case of our own letters V, U, W, Y, 
and F, which are all differentiated forms of the 
same symbol. 

The pictorial character of the Hieroglyphs had 
disappeared in the Hieratic of the Papyrus Prisse, 
and hence it is no matter for surprise to find that 
the Egyp. symbols were renamed by the Semites, 
on the acrologic principle, by words significant in 
Sem. speech, the new names being due to a resem- 
blance, real or fanciful, between the form assumed 
by the letter and some object whose name began 
wuth the letter in question, as in our nursery 
picture-books, in which O is an orange, S a swan, 
and B a butterfly. Thus the first symbol was no 
longer ahom, the 'eagle,' as in Egyp., but became 
'aleph, the 'ox,' from the resemblance to the front 
view of the head and horns of that animal ; and the 
13th, instead of being mulak, the 'owl,' became 7/i«m, 
the ' waters,' what iiad been the ears and beak of 




the owl coining to resemble the undulations of 
waves (see col. 2 and 3). The Sem. names are 
sometimes more easily explained by the Egyp. 
forms of the Papyrus Prisse than by those in the 
oldest Sem. inscriptions. The Sem. names are 
usually interpreted as follows : 'a/e/)A means an ' ox ' ; 
beth signifies a ' house ' ; and gimd, a ' camel,' the 
Hieratic form resembling a recumbent camel, with 
the head, neck, body, tail, and saddle, of which 
only the head and neck are presened in the oldest 
Sem. letter; daleth means a 'door,' not a house 
door, but the curtain forming the entrance to an 
Eastern tent : he signifies a ' window ' ; vau is a nail, 
peg, or hook for hanging things on ; zayin probably 
denotes ' weapons ' ; hith, a fence or ' palisade ' ; 
tetJi, from a root meaning cur>'ature, is supposed 
to have been a picture ot a coiled snake ; yod is, 
the ' hand ' ; kaph the ' pahn ' of the hand, or the 
bent hand; lamed is an 'ox -goad'; memj the 
' waters ' ; nun, a ' fish ' ; samekh is probably a 
prop or support; 'ayin is the 'eye ; pe, the 
' mouth ' ; zade is probably a ' javelin,' or perhaps 
a hook ; kojph is usually supposed to mean a ' kno^ ; 
resh is the ' head ' ; skin, the ' teeth ' ; tau, a ' cross,' 
or sign for marking beasts. It will be noticed that 
six of these names, gimel, he, yod, nun, pe, and 
samekh, must be very ancient, being most easily 
explained by reference to the Hieratic forms. 

The early history of the A. has to be recon- 
structed from inscriptions, many of which have 
only been discovered in recent years. Among the 
monuments of the older stage of the Phoen. A. the 
great inscription of Mesha, long of Moab, ranks 
first in importance. In 1868 Mr. Klein, of the 
C. M. S., \'isited the site of Dibon, the ancient 
capital of the kingdom of Moab. Here he was 
shown a block of basalt, with an inscription in 34 
lines of writing. The interest excited by this 
discovery, and the rival eflbrts of the European 
consuls to secure the treasure, unfortunately aroused 
the jealousy of the Arabs, by whom the stone was 
broken into fragments, some forty of which have 
been recovered, enough to lay the foiindation of 
early Sem. palaeography. In this inscription, which 
must be referred to the middle of the 9th cent. 
B.C., Mesha, in language closely akin to Bibl. 
Hebrew, gives an account of the wars between Israel 
and Moab, narrating more esp. those events in his 
own reign which took place after the death of Ahab 
in 853 B.C. The year 850 B.C. has been generally 
accepted by scholars as an approximate date for the 
record. Somewhat earlier, though of less historical 
importance, are some inscribed fragments of bronze 
vessels, obtained from Cyprus in 1876, which 
proved to be portions of two bowls containing dedi- 
cations to Baal Lebanon. They must have been 
carried oti" to Cyprus as a part of the spoils from a 
temple on Lebanon. The writing on one of the 
bowls proves on pala?ographieal grounds to be 
nearly of the same date as the Moabite inscrip- 
tion, while that on the other bowl exhiLlLa more 
archaic forms of several letters, and may probably 
be older by a century, belonging to the close of the 
10th or the beginning of the ll jh cent. B. C. It is 
from these bowls, supplemented' by the evidence of 
the Moabite Stone, tliat the A. in col. 3 has been 

It is called the Israelitic A. in order to avoid 
confusion ^vith a much later A., which, having been 
first known to scholars, usurped the name of the 
Heb. A. It cannot be too carefully remembered 
that at successive periods in their history the 
Hebrews employed two A.s, identical in all 
essential particmars, but wholly unlike in the 
external appearance of the letters. From the 
earliest period of which we possess any knowledge, 
down to the captivity in Babylon, this Phcen. A., 
of which the oldest monuments are the Moabite 

Stone and the Baal Lebanon bowls, must also have 
been the contemporary A. of the Hebrews. This 
was ingeniously proved by Gresenius, long before 
these monuments were discovered. He contended 
that the earlier books of the OT could not have been 
written, as was formerly supposed, in what is 
now known as the Heb. A., since many obvious 
corruptions in the text could only have arisen from 
the errors of copyists, who confounded letters which 
are much alike in the old Phoen., but are quite dis- 
similar in the square Hebrew. For example, in the 
list of David's mighty men, recorded in 2 S 23**, 
we have the name Heleb, which in the parallel 
passage in 1 Ch 11^ appears as Heled. One of 
these readings is obviously corrupt, and the corrup- 
tion can only be due to the original record ha^dng 
been written in the older or Phcen. A., in which 
the letters beth and daleth differ so slightly as 
often to be hardly distinguishable, whereas in the 
later or square lleb. A the letters a and n are 
unmistakably distinct. Hence, he argued, the 
record must be prior to the Capti^nty, when, 
according to the Kabbinic tradition, the new A. 
was introduced. When Gresenius wrote, the evi- 
dence as to the nature of the older Heb. A. was 
scanty in the extreme, being limited to a few 
engraved gems in the Phoen. A., supposed to be 
Heb. because of their bearing names apparently 
Jewish. Now, however, all doubts have been set 
at rest by the accidental discovery in 1SS*J of the 
famous Siloam inscription, engraved in a recess of 
the tunnel which pierces the ridge of Ophel, and 
brings water from the Pool of the Virgm to the 
Pool of Siloam. The inscription which records the 
construction of the tunnel is in six lines of writing, 
manifestly later in date than the Moabite inscrip- 
tion, though of the same type. On palaeographi<al 
CTOunds it has been assigned to the reign of 
Manasseh, B.C. 685-641, though it is possible that 
it may be as early as the reign of Hezekiah, and 
may refer to the conduit constructed by him at the 
end of the 8th cent., as recorded in 2' K 20*' and 
2 Ch 32^. This A. is of special interest, as in it 
most of the Avritings of the Jewish prophets must 
have been composed. This older A. lingered long, 
being employed on the coins of the Maccabees and 
on those of the Hasmomean princes. It survives as 
the sacred script of the few Samaritan families at 
Nabliis, who still worship in their temple on Mt. 
Gterizim, and keep the Passover with the ancient 
rites. With this exception, the old Phcen. A., the 
parent of all existing A.s, has become extinct. 

This earliest type of the Sem. A. gradually 
passes into another, somewhat more cursive, which 
goes by the name of the Sidonian, its chief repre- 
sentative being the great inscription on the magni- 
ficent basalt sarcophagus of Eshmunazar, king of 
Sidon, now in the Louvre, which is assigned to the 
end of the 5th cent. B.C. Out of this Sidonian 
type was evolved the Aramaean A., which was 
destined to replace the Phoen. after the decadence 
of the Phoen. power. The great trade route from 
the Red Sea and Egypt to Babylon passed through 
Damascus, Hamath, and CarchemLsh, and the 
trade fell into the hands of the Aramaeans, the 
people of N. Syria. Hence, on the political decline 
of tne Phoen. cities, the Aramasan language and A 
became the medium of commercijd intercourse 
throughout W. Asia. At Nineveh in the 7th cent. 
B.C., and at Babylon in the 6th, the Sidonian type 
begins to be replaced by the Aramaean, whose 
continuous development may be traced from the 
5th to the 1st cent. B.C., first on the coins struck 
by Persian satraps of Asia Minor, and then by the 
aid of mortuary inscriptions and papyri front 
Egypt, which carry on the record after the con- 
quests of Alexander had put an end to the Persian 
satrapies. An inspection of col. 4 in the table will 




show that the chief characteristics of the Aramaean 
A. — due evidently to the free use of the reed pen 
and papyrus — are a j>r()gressive openinj? of the 
closed kK)i)s of the letters beth, daleth, teth, 'ayin, 
koph, antt rcih ; while he, van, zayin, hcth, and 
tau tend to lose their distinctive bars. At the 
same time the script continually becomes more 
cursive in character, the tails of the letters curving 
more and more to the left, while the introduction 
of ligatures led to a distinction between the linal 
and tlie ujeiliul or initial forms of certain letters. 
These changes, while they made writing easier and 
more rapid, at the same time made it less legible. 

On the return of the Jews from the Bab. exile, 
the ancient A. of Israel, though retained on the 
Macealiiean coins, and possibly m copies of the law, 
was gr.ulually abandoned for the more cursive but 
far inferior Aramiean, which had become the 
mercantile script of the W. provinces of Persia. A 
Jewish tradition, preserved in the Talm., attributed 
this change to Ezra ; but there can be no doubt that 
both scripts were for a time employed concurrently 
— the Aramaean by the mercantile classes and the 
returning exiles, and the older A. by those who, 
like the Samaritans, had been left behind in the 

The older Phoen. style had fortunately been 
transmitted to the GreeKS before the Aramaean de- 
formation had taken place. Consequently the Kom. 

A. which we have inherited, being a Western form 
of the Greek A., has retained in such letters as 

B, D, O, Q, K, E, F, H those loops and bars whose 
disappearance in the Heb., Syr., Arab., and other 
A.s descended from the Aramsean, has contributed 
to make them so illegible. Our own capitals are, 
in fact, nmch nearer to the primitive Phcen. or Isr. 
A. than any of the existing Sem. A.s, and it is 
to this retention of the arcnaic forms that they 
owe their excellence and general superiority. The 
closed loo|) of D and R and the upper loop of B repro- 
duce the closed triangles of the earlier Sem. script, 
which were lost by the Aramrean deformation, and 
are consequently much superior to the formless 
shapes t t 3 which we have in modern Hebrew. 

When the Seleucidan empire had come to a 
close, the Aramaean broke up into national scripts, 
the A. of Eastern Syria developing at Bozra, Petra, 
and the Hauran into the Nabatfean, which was 
the parent of Arabic, while the Aramaean of N. 
Syria developed at Edessa into Syriac, and that of S. 
Syria, at Jerus. and Bab. , into wliat is called Hebrew. 
The early form of square Heb. used at Jerus. in 
the time of our Lord, with which He must Himself 
have been familiar, and in which probably the roll 
was written Avhiclx He read in the synagogue 
(Lk 4"), is given in col. 5 of the table. This A. has 
been obtained from monuments of the Heroilian 
period found in Galilee or at Jerus., all of wliich 
must be anterior to the siege by Titus. These 
inscriptions are chiefly from tombs ; but one of 
them, of special interest, is a fragment of one of 
the notices, enjoining silence and reverent be- 
haviour, set up, as we learn from Josephus, when 
the temple was rebuilt by Herod. 

The materials for the history of the Heb, A. 
during the period of the dispersion, from the Ist 
cent, to the 10th, when it practically assumed its 
present form, have been gathered from regions 
curiously remote. Some are from the Jewish 
Catacombs at Rome, many from the Crimea, others 
from the JeAvish cemeteries at Vienne, Aries, and 
Narbonne in Gaul, at Tortosa in Spain, Venosa in 
Italy, from Prag, Aden, Tillis, and Derbend, and, 
not least in iniiiortance, the writing on some cabal- 
istic bowls found at Babylon, dating from the 4th to 
the 7th cent. A.D. (see eol. 6). The earliest exist- 
ing codex, the A. of which is given in col. 7, dates 
from the beginning of the lUth cent., when the 

letters had practically assumed their modem 
forms though not their modern aspect, the useless 
ornamental apices in our ])rinted books (col. 8) 
being due to the schools of Heb. caligraphy which 
arose in the 12th cent. The square Heb. of our 
printed Bibles is thus one of the most modern of 
existing A.s, and was not, as was formerly be- 
lieved, the most ancient of all. The forms of these 
letters are thus neither legible nor venerable. 
Their adoption was almost a matter of accident. 
There were two styles, the Spanisli and the 
German, and the latter was used in the Miinster 
printed Bible, the types being imitated from those 
in MSS. then in fashion, 'rhe result is that our 
eyes are fatigued with the fantastic and vicious 
caligraphy of the 14th cent., a period when the 
odious black letter was developed out of the 
beautiful Caroline minuscule, to which in our 
printed books we have now fortunately reverted. 
So in Heb. it would have been much better to have 
reverted to the far superior forms of earlier times, 
such, for instance, as those in use in the 8th cent. 
The earlier forms are better, because the letters are 
free from useless ornamental Nourishes which are 
so trying to the eyes of students and compositors, 
and are more legible and more distinct. As in the 
case of our own vicious black letter, some characters 
are assimilated so as to be difficult to distinguish — in 
particular 3 beth, 3 kaph ; 3 nun, J rfimd ; t daleth, 
T resh ; i kaph final, j nun final ; i vau, ^ zayin ; or 
of D samekh, and d miem linal ; while n n and n 
stand for A, h, and t. 

Six of the Heb. letters gradually acquired an 
alternative softer aspirated sound, and the harder 
primitive sounds are now denoted by an internal 
point (Dagesh Icne) a a i 3 d b, representing the 
sounds b, g, d, k, p, t, the same forms without the 
Dagesh, or with a superscript line called Raphe, 
standing for bh, gh, dh, kh, ph, th. The letter 
shin also split up into two sounds, distinguished by 
diacritical points, b- approaching the sound of our 
s, and V that of our sh. 

The vowel points are late and of little authority. 
The Greek transliterations of Heb. names in the 
Sept. and in Josephus suffice to prove that there 
were no vowel points in the copies of the Heb. Scrip- 
tures then in use, and as late as the time of St. 
Jerome the Heb. vocalisation was only known by 
oral teaching. The Heb. points were suggested by 
those which had been introduced into Syriac in the 
5th and 6th cent. A.D. They merely represent 
the traditional pronunciation used in the syna- 

fogues of Tiberias in the 7th cent. A.D. (See art. 

ALPH^US, 'A\<f>aioi (Westcott and Hort, Introd. 
§ 408, assuming tliat the name is a transliteration 
of the Aramaic '8^n, wTite it with the rough breath- 
ing, 'AX^ttios), occurs four times in tlie (Jospels and 
once in Acts. As thus used it is tlir naine of two 
different men. 

1. The father of the Apostle MaLlhew or Levi 
(Mk 2'^), not elsewhere named or otherwise known. 

2. All the other references are evidently to 
another man (Mt lO^, Mk 3'8, Lk 6i», Ac l^^), who 
is represented as father of James the apostle, second 
of that name in the list. 

A considerable controversy has long been carried 
on as to whether this A. may be identified ^vith the 
Clopas of Jn 19-» and the Cleopas of Lk 24is. This 
(question has been of special interest as involved 
in the discussion regarding James and the Brethren 
of the Lord (wh. see). Ewald boldly assumes that 
the Clopas of John and the Cleopas of Luke are one, 
but maintains that the identification with Alphaeus 
is an unreasonable confounding of a purely Greek 
with a ])urely Hebrew name (Hist, of Israel, vL 
305, note 4). Meyer affirms the identity of the 




Cloi)as of John with the Aramaic 's'T", the Alphseus 
of the Sj-noptics. And Alford (on Mt 10^) rej^ards 
the two' Greek names as simply two different 
ways of expressing the Hebrew name ^s^ri- It 
seems l>etter to distinguish the Cleopas of Luke 
from the Clopas of Jolm. It is quite evident that 
Cleopas is simply a shortened form of Cleopater 
( KXfoirarpos), like Antipas for Antipater. Lightfoot, 
indeed, while admitting this, still favours the 
identification of the two names. On the other 
hand, Clopas may with the higliest probability be 
regarded as a simple transliteration of the Aramaic 
Halphai. Clopas (as in the Greek text and RV, 
not Cleopas as in the AV) is represented in Jn 
19^ as the husband of one of the Marys who stood 
beside the cross. If we assume that four women 
are there referred to, there is no indication of any 
relationship between the wife of Clopas and the 
mother of Jesus. The synoptic passages, however, 
all mention among the women at the cross this 
same Mary as the mother of James. There is no 
reason for supposing that this James, son of Mary, 
is any other than James the son of Alphteus. But 
the assumption that Clopas was husband of Mary 
and brother of Joseph, and the usual assumption 
that Mary Mas the sister of our Lord's mother, are 
equally groimdless, and have no support whatever 
from any statement in our Gospels. There seems 
no reason for supposing that James the little and 
James the brother of the Lord are one and the same 
person. Eusebius, indeed, mentions, on the autho- 
rity of Hegesippus, that Symeon, who succeeded 
James in the bishopric of Jerusalem, was son of 
Clopas the brother of Joseph ; but Symeon is 
evidently regarded, not as a brother, but only as a 
relative, probably a cousin, of his predecessor James. 

Literature. — Besides the works referred to in the text, see 
Lightfoot, Galatians, 10th ed. London, 1S90, p. 267; Mayor, The 
Epistle of St. James, 1S92, p. y\-if. See also an interesting and 
clever but perverse note in Keim, Jesus o/Nazara, iii. 276. 

J. Macphersox. 

ALTAR. — i. Altak is the invariable rendering in 
the OT of r?i? * (Aram. n;-;.p Ezr 7^''), and in the 
NT of Ova-iaffTrjpiojf. In AV it also occurs as the 
rendering of Vx-in (Ezk 43'^), RV ' upper a.', and 
of '7X1?? fEzk 43'5»'- 1« — Kethib ^'k-,j<), RV ' a. 
hearth.' In the NT /Sw/aoj is found once (Ac 17^) 
in the sense of a heathen a. This distinction 
is very clearly brought out in 1 Mac 1'* ' they did 
sacrifice upon the idol altar (eiri t6v ^ufiSv) which 
was upon the altar of God (t. dvffiaffrripiov).' Simi- 
larly the Vulg. and early Lat. Fathers avoid the 
use of ara, preferring altaria and alta re. Another 
designation is met M^ith, ^-iz. j-'^r, prop. ' table,' 
Ezk 41^^- 4416, Mai V- 1-. It would also seem that 
the appellation nz2, prop. ' high place,' may in some 
cases Vje used to express 'a.,' as Jer 7*^ (LXX rdv 
/Sojuoi/ Tov Td^ied), 2 K 23* (but here text is doubt- 
ful), ctL-. z'lz'^ Is 65^ is Avrongly rendered in AV 
' a* of brick " ; RV ' ujK)n the bricks.' In one or 
two places in the OT rzp of the present MT 
seems an alteration from an original nssa. So 
clearly Gn 33^, and most probably 2 K 12»». On 
the other hand, nam shouM perhaps be restored in 
2 K 10^ (Stade in ZATJV. v. pp. 278, 289 f.). 

ii. Altars ix Prehlstoric TiMt:s.— According 
to the primitive conceptions of the nomad Semites, 
the presence of a deity was implied in everj' spot 
that attracted them by its water or shade, and in 
every imposing landmark that guided them in 
their wanderings. Every well and grove, every 
mountain and rock, had its presiding deity. The 
humble offering of the worshipper could be cast 
into the well, exposed upon the rock, or hung upon 
the sacred tree. It was thus brought into imme- 
diate contact with the rmmen therein residing. A 
great step in advance was taken when it was con- 
* Lit. ' place of slaughter.' 

ceived that the deity could not only reside in such 
objects of nature's own creation as those above 
specified, but could be persuaded ' to come and 
take for his embodiment a structure set up for him 
by the worshipper ' (W. R. Smith, Rel. Sem. p. 
189). The consideration of this all-important 
advance belongs elsewhere ; it is suflicient to note 
here that recent researches, esp. those of W'ell- 
hausen and W. R. Smith, have abundantly proved 
that the heathen Semite regarded the stone or 
cairn which he had himself erected, as a dwelling- 
place of a deity, a Beth-el ('?K"n*5, cf. Gn 28^** ; for 
the significance of this passage, see Pill.\r), a 
name which passed, through the Phoenicians as 
intermediaries, to the Greeks ipairvXiov) and 
Romans (bcettilus). Such a stone was termed by 
the Arabs, in the days before Islam, nusb (pi. 
ansdb), a word identical in origin and signification 
with the Heb. n^x? (AV 'pillar'). Beside it the 
victim was slaughtered ; the blood was either 
poured over the stone, or with part of it the stone 
was smeared, while the rest was poured out at its 
base, the essential idea in this primitive rite being 
that in this way the blood was brought into im- 
mediate contact M-ith the deity who, for the time 
being, had taken up his abode in the stone. 

Now there can be no doubt that the same primi- 
tive ideas were shared by the ancestors of the Heb- 
rews. Among them, too, the nusb or viazzeba must 
have been the prototype of the sacrificial a. ' The 
rude Arabian usage is the primitive type out of 
which all the elaborate a. ceremonies of the more 
cultivated Semites grew ' (Rel. of Sem. 1st ed. p. 184. 
See also Sacrifice). Even in hist, times we find 
among the Hebrews a survival of the primitive ritual 
above described. In the narrative of the battle of 
Michmash, Saul is shocked at the unseemly haste 
of his warriors in eating flesh * with the blood,' 
and orders a great stone to be brought at which 
the beasts might be duly slain and their blood 
poured out at the extemporised altar. 

The next important step, the advance from the 
a. as a sacred stone to receive the blood of the 
victim to the a. as a hearth on which the flesh of 
the victim was burned in whole or in part, belongs 
to the history of S.\CRIFICE (which see, and ef. 
Smith, .Be/. &m. p. 3o8ff.). 

If the above is a correct account of the evolution 
of the a. among the western Semites, the differ- 
entiation of pillar and a. must, as regards the 
inhabitants of Pal., have taken place in the pre- 
historic period. This seems the obvious conclusion 
from the existence, even at the present day, of 
immense numbers of megalithic monuments, the 
so-called menhirs and dolmens. These charac- 
teristic remains of antiquity, so numerous in Moab 
and in the W. Hauran, must undoubtedly have 
played an important part in the religious rites of 
those who reared them, and whom, for the present, 
we may assume to have been of a Sem. stock. The 
' cup-hollows " on the table-stone of the dolmens, 
connected in many cases by a network of channels, 
must have been destined to receive the blood of 
the A-ictim.* 

iii. Pre - Deuteroxomic Altars. — A very 
marked distinction, as is well known, exists be- 
tAveen the attitude to sacrifice of the prophetic and 
priestly narratives respectively in our present Pent. 
The la'tter (P) limits sacrifice to the great central 
a.,t whUe the former (JE) relates numerous in- 

• See Conder's report on the dolmen-fields of Moab in P.E.F. 
Qu. St. 18»2, p. 75 ff. ; also in Heth and Moab, chs. vii. and \-iiL; 
Syr. Stone Lore, pp. 42, 43, 70. Another rich field has been 
described bv Schumacher, The Jaulan, p. 123 ff.; Across 
Jordan, p. 62 ff. Cf. Perrot and Chipiez, Hist, de VArt dans 
FAntiquitd, iy.p. S750. 

t The difficult section (Jos 22i"-ai) seems best e.xplained as an 
endeavour to reduce a narrative originally written from the 
standpoint of JE to an apparent harmony with the fundamental 
ixwtulate of P. 




stances of sacrifice being ottered and a* erected 
from the earliest times, and in many difi"erent 
places. Noah is represented as building an a. on 
quitting the ark (Gn 8*) ; Abraham erected 
several, viz. at Shechem (127), Bethel (12»), Hebron 
(13"), and on a special occasion in 'the land of 
Moriah' (22»). Isaac (26^) and Jacob (35^) do 
likewise. Even Moses, according to this source, 
erects an altar at Kephidim (Ex 17"), and another, 
accompanied by twelve pillars (niaxo), at Horeb 
(24*). JE therefore clearly knows nothing in its 
narrative parts of the exclusive legitimacy of a 
central a. With this position the law-code which 
it contains, the so-called Book of the Covenant 
(see Driver, LOT 28 fi'.), is in comjplete accord. 
In the locu^ classictis (Ex 20-'*) a plurality of a» 
is clearly sanctioned : ' in every place (KV) where 
I record My name, I will come unto thee, and I 
will bless thee.' And the same holds good through- 
out the liistory of the Hebrews until the time of 
Josiah. Again and again do we lind a" built, up 
and down the country, either by the recognised 
religious leaders themselves, or with their express 
sanction. Thus, to mention but a few, Joshua 
builds an a. on Mt. Ebal (Jos 8^) in accordance 
with the injunction of Moses himself (Dt 27"), 
Gideon at Uphrah (Jg 6-*), and Samuel at liamah 
(1 S 7"). Saul, we have already seen, extemporised 
an a. at Michmash, which the historian informs 
us was ih*ijirst that Saul built, implying tliat this 
monarch had the merit of erecting several. David 
erected an a., by express divine command, 'in 
the threshing - floor of Araunah the Jebusite ' 
(2 S 24"*- '^). Elijah, too, complains of the destruc- 
tion of the altars of J" as an act of sacrilege 
(1 K 19^"- "), and had, but a little before, repaired, 
with his own hand, the a. of the Lord upon Mt. 
Carmel. These examples are sufficient to show that 
in pre-Deut. Israel a plurality of a» was regarded 
as a matter of course, there being not the slightest 
hint of disapproval on the part of the narrators, or 
of any idea in the minds of the actors in the 
history that they were guilty of the violation of 
any divine command. 

From the oldest records of the Hebrews, 
therefore, it is evident that local sanctuaries 
abounded throughout the country (see High Place, 
and esp. 1 Sam. passim), the most essential feature 
of which was undoubtedly the a. on which sacri- 
fice was offered to the national God, J". Of the 
form of these pre-Deut. altars we have no precise 
information. No doubt, as wealth and culture in- 
creased, the a*, esp. at Bethel and the other great 
sanctuaries, would become more and more elabo- 
rate ; but in more primitive times they were simple 
in the extreme. A heap of earth, either by itself 
(2 K 5") or with a casing of turf (see Dillmann on 
Ex 20=**), a few stones piled upon each other, are all 
that was required. Simplicity is the dominant 
note of the law in the fundamental passage. Ex 
»2(pff.. It is there enjoined, moreover, that no tool 
shall be lifted to hew or dress the stone (cf. Dt 27*, 
Jos 8", 1 Mac 4*7). In this many modem investi- 
gators have seen a survival of the primitive idea, 
already explained, of a numen inhabiting the altar- 
stone, who would be driven out or perhaps injured 
by the process of dressing (Nowack, Archiiol. ii. 
17 ; Benzinger, Archdol. 379). Another injunction, 
that the worshipper (for the command is not ad- 
dre8.sed to the priests) should not ascend by steps 
(loc. dt.), is also a plea for simplicity. The a. must 
not be of suoli a neight as to prevent the M'or- 
shipper standing on the ground from manipulating 
his oflfering.* The evasion of the injunction by a 
sloping ascent was an afterthought. 

* Of. the early naimtive 1 K 228ff- where Joab is represented oa 
gTMping the horns of the a. (see below, v.X and at the same time 
standing by the side of the a. Also 2 K 6'' * tveo mules' burden.' 

To what extent the still existing dolmens (see 
above) may have been used as a' in this period it 
is impossible to say. In the older narratives, how- 
ever, there are not a few instances of the earlier 
usage of a single stone (1 S 6'* — v." is a later 
insertion — 14^) or of the native rock as an a. (Jg 
G^ and esp. isi"-!*" where Tvn v.'" is identified with 
03:9.1 v.^). The site of David's a., we can scarely 
doubt, was the Sakhrah rock, now enclosed in the 
so-called mosque of Omar. The ' stone Zoheleth 
which is by En-Kogel ' was also an ancient altar- 
stone (1 K 1*). Solomon, finally, at the dedication 
of the temple, is said to have converted the ' middle 
of the court' into a huge a. (1 K 8**). For Solo- 
mon's brazen a., see Temple.* This a. was re- 
moved by Ahaz (2 K 16'"") to make way for the 
stone a. (note njj v.") which he caused to be built 
after the model of the great a. of Damascus (asi^n, 
cf. v.^" in RV). Ahaz' a., rather than the brazen 
a. of Solomon, was in its turn the model for the 
a. of Ezekiel (cf. 43i=*-"). 

Of the other a' made by Ahaz we know nothing, 
nor of those set up by later kings (2 K 23^^ loc. 
cit.). As to the a. to liaal which Ahab erected in 
Samaria (1 K 16^^), we may assume that it re- 
sembled the a* erected by his Phccn. neighbours 
to the same deity (cf. Perrot et Chipiez, J{ist. de 
I' Art dans I'Antiq. iii. fig. 192 omA passim). 

iv. Post-Deuteronomic Altars. — The sanctu- 
aries and a', sanctioned, as we have seen, by the 
oldest law-code, ceased to be legitimate on the 
adoption of the code of Deut. (Dt 12 ff.). The 
centralisation of the cultus, which was tlie chief 
aim of the Deut. legislation, seems to have been 
attempted under Hezekiah (2 K 18-^), but it must 
be admitted that the complete abandonment of the 
local bumoth was never unfait accompli until after 
the discipline of the Exile (1 K 22*^, 2 K 15^). In 
theory, however, the a', whether ' upon the hills 
and under every green tree,' or at places which had 
been seats of worship since the conquest, were no 
longer legitimate ; for sacrifice, as now for the first 
time officially distinguished from slaughter (Dt 
12^^), could only be ottered with acceptance on the 
a. of the central sanctuary at Jerusalem. It is not 
impossible that, as Conder has suggested (see ref. 
above), it is to the reforming zeal of Josiah that we 
owe the fact that not a single dolmen has been 
met with in S. Pal. (cf. Cheyne, Jeremiah, p. 60). 
The history of the a., therefore, from this time 
forward is merged in the history of the temple. It 
must suttice here to note that, as soon as practi- 
cable, the returned exiles built the a. on its former 
site (Ezr 3^), which a. continued in use until its 
desecration by Antiochiis Epiphanes (1 Mac 1"). 
Having by this act of sacrilege been rendered unfit 
for further use, it was taken do\\Ti and another 
built in its stead (1 Mac 4**^-)- The a. of Herod's 
temple was the last built on Je>vish soil. Accord- 
ing to Jos. ( Wars, v. v. 6) it was built, in harmony 
with the ancient prescription, of unhewn stones. 
One other a. meets us in the history of the Jews ; 
this is the a. erected by Onias IV. in his temple at 
Leontopolis in E^pt (Jos. Wars, vil. x. 3 ; Ant. 
XIII. iii. 31), founding on a mistaken interpretation 
of Is 19i». 

The a. of burnt-offering and the a. of incense, 
which play so important a part in the ritual legis- 
lation of the Priests' Code (P), will be diseased 
in detail in the article Tabernacle. See also 

V. The Altar as Asylum. — An important 
function of the a. among the Hebrews remains to be 

* W. R. Smith's view, that 'it is very doubtful whether there 
was in the first t«mple any other brazen a. than the two brazen 
nillani, Jachin and Boaz,' is not supported by sufficient evidence. 
It is, besides, difficult to see why only one of the two pillars 
should have had, on this theory, tlie functions of an a. assigned 
to it {Ret. Sem. i. pp. S5S-S69, and Note L, 466 ff.). 


a:malek, amalekites 


noticed. The earliest legislation presupposes and 
confirms the sanctity of the a. as an asylum. The 
right of asylum, however, is there limited to cases 
of accidental homicide (Ex 21^^"). This use of 
the a. , which is not confined to the Sem. peoples, 
is also a survival of the primitive idea of the a. as 
the temporary abode of a deity. In clasping the 
a., the fugitive was placing himself under the im- 
mediate protection of the deity in question. In 
this connexion, as well as in regard to an im- 
portant part of the fully - developed a. ritual 
(of. Lv 4"'^-), the horns of the a. are esteemed 
the most sacred part of the whole. It is difficult, 
however, to see how these could have formed part 
of the more ancient a. as prescribed in the Book of 
the Covenant {see above) ; yet their presence is 
amply attested in later times (cf. Am 3", Jer 17^, 
and the incidents recorded in 1 K 1**^ 2^). The 
origin and primary significance of the horns are 
still obscure. Most recent writers seek to trace a 
connexion between them and the worship of 
J" in the form of a young bull (Kuenen, Jiel. of 
Isr. i. 326 ; Stade, Benzinger, Nowack). In any 
case they are not to be regarded as mere append- 
ages, but as an int«gral part of the a. (see DUl- 
mann on Ex 27-). The \-iew that they were 
originally projections to which the victims were 
bound, has no better support than the corrupt 
passage, Ps 118^ (for which see Comm.). The 
comparison of the ' horns ' of the Heb. with those 
of the Greek a. (eurepoos ^afiM^) seems misleading, 
since the latter rather resembled the volutes of the 
Ionic capital (cf. art. ara in Daremberg et Saglio, 
Dktionnaire etc., figs. 410, 418, 422). The famous 
stele of Teima, on the other hand, shows the 
'horns' rising from the comers of the a;, and 
curved like those of an ox (see Perrot et Chipiez, 
op. cit. tome iv. p. 392, Eng. tr. [see below] vol. L 
p. 304). 

LaxKRATTRK. — Of the earlier literature the standard work is 
John Spencer's De legibiu Heb. rUxtalxbut, etc 1685. Of the 
modem works the most important are the works on Hebrew 
antiquities by De Wette, Ewald (^Eag. tr. 1376), Kowack {Heb- 
raitche Archdoloffie, 13d4, Band iL SacralalterUiuner, $ 73 ff.), 
and Benzin^r {Heb. Arehdologie, 1894, § 52, Die altisraeL Heilig- 
thfimer, etc), and the more general treatises of WeUhansen 
(Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, m.,liegte arab. Heidentkums, 18S7X 
and, in particular, W. R. Smith's Religion of the SemHe*, 1888 
(2nd ed. 1S95). 'The student should also consult the standard 
work of Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de FArt dam eAntiquiU, 
tome iii. Ph&nieie, iv. Judie, etc (Eng. tr. Hitt. of Art m 
PhoerUcia, 2 vols. 18ffi, Hut. of A. in Judea etc, 2 vols. 1890)l 

A. R. S. Kekxedy. 
AL-TASHHETH (nrnrr^x, AV Al-taschith), Pss 
57. 58. 59. 65 (titles). See Psalms. 

ALTOGETHER is now only an adv., but was at 
first an adj., being simply a stronger ' all.' As an 
adj. it is found in Ps 39* ' Verily every man at his 
best state is a. vanity ' ; Is 1(^ ' Are not my 
princes a. (RV 'all of them') kings,' and perhaps 
jsu 16^^. Of its use as an adv. noticeable examples 
are Jer 30'^, where ' I Avill not leave thee a. un- 
punished ' is given in RV ' I will in no wise leave 
thee unpunished ' ; Ac 26'^, where ' both almost and 
a.' is in RV ' whether with little or with much ' after 
the Gr. ; and 1 Co 5"*, where ' not a.' (Gr. oi rdm-bn) 
is taken by commentators in two directly opp. 
senses, either ' not whoUy,' or ' not at all'' ; RV 
gives the first in text, the second in marg. 

J. Hastings. 

ALUSH (c^/k). — A station in the joumeyings, 
occurs only Nu 33^*- ". (See SiXAI.) 

ALYAN ("i^s).— Son of Shobal, a Horite (Gn 362^). 
The name appears in 1 Ch 1* as Allan (i;7i'). It is 
clearly the same as Alvah {■■n.Vr) in Gn 36*', which 
appeals in 1 Ch 1^ as Aliah (•t;H'), one of the 
' dukes ' of Edom. Knobel compares the name with 
that of a Bedawin clan Alawin, said by Burckhardt 

to be dwelling north of the Gulf of Akabah. See 
Dillm. in loe. H. E. Ryle. 

ALWAY, ALWAYS.— Alway (».«. 'aU the way') 
is originally the accus. of duration, 'all the 
time ' ; while always is the genit. of occurrence, 
' at all times.' And although by 1611 this dis- 
tinction was vanishing, there are some undoubted 
instances in AV. Cf . Mt 28* ' Lo, I am \nth. you 
alway,' with Ro 1^ ' I make mention of you always 
in my prayers.' RV gives alway for always at 
Ac 24'»«, 2 "f h 1' ; and always for alway at Col 4« 
apparently capriciously, for these changes oblite- 
rate the «iistinction noticed above. When the dis- 
tinction was lost, always drove alway out of use. 

J. Hastings. 

AMAD (i?PB), Jos 19* only.— A city of Asher. 
The site is doubtful ; there are several ruins called 
'Amud in this region. 

AMADATHDS, Est 12« IG^o" 


See Hamme- 

AMAIN only in 2 ]Mac 12^ 'the enemies . . . 
fled a.' (so R\ , Gr. eis <pvyr)v wpaifffop). The mean- 
ing is 'at once, precipitately.' 

AMAL (fe?) — A descendant of Asher, 1 Ch 7*. 
See Genealogy. 

AMALEK, AMALEKITES {phsji, 'i?^?i;). — A 
nomadic Arabian tribe, occupying the wide desert 
r^on between Sinai on the south and the southern 
borders of Palestine on the north. This district 
corresponds to what is now called the wilderness of 
Et-Tih. The Amalekites are represented as per- 
petually at feud with the Israehtes, though such 
closely connected tribes as the Kenites and Keniz- 
zites appear from the first as friendly, and ulti- 
mately as peaceful settlers in the midst of the 
possessions of Israel. 

References to the Amalekites appear very early 
in the OT history. In the account of the cam- 
paigns of Chedorlaomer of Elam and his confeder- 
ates in Gn 14, ' the country of the Amalekites ' 
near Kadesh is described as the scene of one of 
those desolatin^r wars, Hengstenberg, followed by 
Kurtz, maintains that this does not imply that 
the Amalekites were in existence in the days of 
Abraham, but only that this country, lying be- 
tween Kadesli and the land of the Amorites, after- 
wards known as ' the fields of the Amalekites,' was 
at that early period overrun and destroyed by 
Chedorlaomer. Had there been no other Lints of 
the extreme antiquity of the Amalekites, this ex- 
planation might perhaps be accepted. But we find 
again in the chant of Balaam (Nu 24^) that 
Amalek is described as ' the first of the nations,' 
which seems almost certainly to mean a primitive 
people to be reckoned among the very oldest of 
the nations. Most recent scholars are agreed in 
assigning to the Amalekites a high antiquity. 
This is the conclusion to which such passages as 
those referred to would naturally lead. The only 
reason why an attempt shotild be made to put any 
other interpretation upon these words is the idea 
that, in Gn 36^, the descent of the Amalekites is 
traced from Amalek, the grandson of Esau, and 
their origin thus brought down to a later period 
than that of Abraham. It is exceedingly hazardous 
to build any argument of this sort on an occasional 
statement in a genealogical table reproduced from 
some unknown source, seeing that it is impossible 
to determine what the point of view of the original 
compiler may have been. In many cases such 
genealogical lists seem intended to set forth simply 
certain interrelations of tribes, so that, though terms 
indicating personal and family relationships are 




used, the names do not always belonfic to persons his- 
torically real. All that we need understand Vjy this 
introduction of an Anialek, son of Eliphaz by a 
concubine, is that Tinina the Horite, the concubine 
referred to, represents the iinportJition or incor- 
poration of a foreign and inferior, probably a servile, 
element into the pure Edoinite stock, the Horites 
being one of the tribes forming that federation, 
embracing the Amalekites, conquered by Chedor- 

The region in which the Amalekites first appear 
in history, near Kadesh, lies just about a day's 
journey south of Hebron, <m the undulating slopes 
and plain at the foot of the mountains held 
by the Aniorites. It may be supposed that a 
branch of the tribe had settled there, or had begun 
to engage in agricultural pursuits. When driven 
forth from their possessions by the conqueror, they 
no doubt returned to their old wandering modes of 
life, and rejoined their brethren who moved about 
through the wide extent of the great desert. 

The first meeting of the Israelites and the 
Amalekites took place in the southern part of the 
Sinaitic peninsula. At Rephidim, a broad plain to 
the nortli-west of Mount Sinai, the Amalekites 
came out against the Israelites, and a battle ensued 
which lasted throughout the whole day. Joshua 
commanded in the light, and Moses on the hill top 
held up his rod in the sight of the people as the sign 
from Gofl that they would conauer by His might 
(Ex 17*''®). The Amalekites nad at this time 
acted in a peculiarly bitter and exasperating 
manner towards the Israelites, harassing them on 
their rear, and cutting off the weak and the weary 
(Dt 25""'*). In consequence, the Amalekites, to a 
greater extent than any of the other Can. and 
neighbouring tribes, were placed under the ban, so 
that J" Himself, as well as His people, is repre- 
sented as solemnly swearing eternal feud against 

The defeat of the Amalekites evidently put the 
fear of the Israelites upon the robber nomad tribes 
of the desert for a time, so that they were un- 
molested during their ad^'ance to Sinai, and during 
their year's encampment there, as well as during 
their subsequent march northward to the southern 
border of Palestine at Kadesh. It was the intention 
of the Israelites to enter Palestine from the south, 
and so from this point, just outside of the southern 
Iwundary of Palestine, spies were sent to examine 
the land, and to bring back a report as to wliether 
an entrance from that point was possible, and if so, 
how liest the invading forces might conduct the 
campaign. These spies on their return reported 
that the Amalekites dwelt in the land of the south 
in the valley, i.e. in the southern portions of the 
region afterwards occupied by Judah and Simeon 
(Nu \?P 14'''*), in the neighbourhood of the lowland 
Canaanites and the higliland Hittites, Jebusites, 
and Amorites. The Amalekites are represented 
as the leaders of the confederate Canaanites who 
resisted the entrance of the Israelites into the south 
of Palestine (Nu H^-"*). They were evidently 
at that time of considerable importance, and must 
have been for a long period in possession of those 
territories only a little way north of the district in 
which we find their ancestors, or, at least, a branch 
of the same great nation, settled in the days of 

The bitter opposition shown by the Amalekites 
to the Israelites at Sinai and in Southern Pales- 
tine was dlstintfiiished from that of the other tri>)es 
"by this, that tney were really at the head of the 
confederated clans already in possession of the land, 
and the struggle l>etween them and the invaders 
was to determine the whole future of the rivals, 
the success of the one necessarily meaning the utter 
destruction of the other. ' It was the hatred,' 

says Ewald {History of Israel, L 250), ' of two rivals 
disputing a splendid prize which the one had 
previouslj' possessed and still partially possessed, 
and the otiier was trying to get for himself by 
ousting him.' The bitterness must have been in- 
tensified by the secession to the ranks of Israel of 
such brancnes or families of the Amalekite stem as 
the Kenites and Kenizzites. These two families, 
with Jethro and Caleb resjjectively at their head, 
were the ancient allies of Israel, and ultimately 
settlers in the land. The defeat of the Israelites 
may have secured for the Amalekites and their 
immediate neighbours peace and prosperity through- 
out a whole generation. When they were again 
attacked it was by a people already in possession 
of the northern regions, now pressing southward. 
How far they were interfered with hy Judah and 
Simeon is not recorded, but it would appear that 
even after the Israelitish occupation of the country 
the Amalekites in considerable numbers maintained 
possession of the plateau and hilly icjimi- in the 
extreme south. 

In the time of the Judges, however, we meet 
with the Amalekites in the company of the 
Midianites, as nomad tribes roaming alx)ut among 
their old desert haunts, and pursuing their^ old 
tactics of harassing peaceful agnculturists. When 
the crops sown by the Israelites were ripening, 
the Amalekite marauders descended and reaped 
the harvest, so that the unfortunate inhabitants 
were impoverished and discouraged (Jg 6*). They, 
along with the Ammonites, were allies of the 
Moabites in their conflict with Israel, and no doubt 
suffered in the defeat of the Moabites at the hand 
of Ehud (Jg 313). 

During this same period, it would seem that a 
branch of the Amalekite tribe had secured a 
settlement in Mount Epliraira. Pirathou, the 
residence of the judge Abdon, some 15 miles 
south-west of Shechem, bore the name of ' the 
Mount of the Amalekites,' or had in it a hill 
so called (Jg 121"). ^lie settlers who had thus 
given their name to the hill belonged in all proba- 
bility to a branch of the Amalekites, who, about 
the time that some of their brethren settled in the 
soutli of Palestine, in what was afterward assigned 
to Judah, pressed farther to the north, and secured 
possessions among other Canaanite tribes in the 
very centre of the land. This is more likelv than 
the suggestion of Bertheau, that these Amalekites 
of Ephraim were remnants of those expelled by the 
men of Judah from their southern settlements in 
the days of Joshua. They had evidently been some 
considerable time in possession before localities 
came to be popularly known by their name. This 
view is further confirmed by the words of Deborah 
in her song ( Jg 5"), ' out of Ephraim came they 
down whose root is in (not against, as in AV) 
Amalek.' The land of Ephraim was the territory 
once possessed by the Amalekites. 

In the early years of his reign, Saul wn- < ommis- 
sioned to carry on a war of extermination ugiiiiist 
the Amalekites and their king Agag (IS 15). This 
was intended to be the execution of the sentence 
nassed upon tliem in the days of Moses (Ex 17", 
Nu 2420, Dt 25"-i''). No living thing belonging to 
the Amalekites was to be spared. This great 
battle was evidently fought in the south of Judah, 
as the pursuit is descril)ed as extending from 
Havilah in Arabia, far to the east, to Shur in the 
west of the desert on the border of Egjpt. When 
worsted in battle they e^'idently passed over the 
southern boundary of Palestine, and betook them- 
selves to their ancestral haunts in the \> ild desert. 
During the period of their residence as a settled 
people in Southern Judah, they had a capital 
city, Ir-Amalek, 'the city of Amalek' (1 S 15»). 
liolbber bands of the yet unsubdued nomad Amalek- 




ites of the desert, during the time of David's stay 
among the Philistines, sacked Zikla^, in the terri- 
tory of Simeon, outside of the soutnem boundary 
of Judah (1 S 30). These were overtaken by 
Da^nd, and only 400 yoimg men on swift camels 
succeeded in making their escape. The reference 
to the Araalekites in 2 S 8", in the list of spoils 
iledicated to God by David, is probably to this 
same incident. Froni this time onward the' Amalek- 
ites seem to have been regarded as no longer 
formidable ; and even as raiders from the desert we 
find no further trace of them. The last mention of 
them in the OT occurs in 1 Ch 4*, in the days of 
Hezekiah. There it is said that ' the remnant of 
the Amaleldtes that escaped,' and who had con- 
tinueii till that day in Mount Seir, were smitten 
by 500 of the Simeonites, who took possession of 
their land. That the Amaleldtes are not men- 
tioned in Gn 10 is regarded by DiUmann as proof 
that before the time of the writer they had sunk 
into insignificance. 

Outside of the OT we have no reliable accounts 
of the Amalekites. In the works of the Arabian 
historians very extensive and detailed reports are 
given of the progress and achievements of the 
Amalekites ; but these, as Noldeke has convincingly 
shown, are credible only in so far as they are based 
on the statements of the historical books of our 
own canonical Scriptures. 

LiTTTRATTRE. — A Tcry admirable and comprehensive sketch is 
given by Bertheaa in Schenkel, Bibdleincim, Leipz. 1S69, voL i. 
111-114.' See also Dillmann, Oom. on, Genesis, on chs. z. and 
xxxvi. ; Ewald, Hist, of Israd, Eng, tr, 1876, vol. L 109 f., 
230 r. : Kurtz, Uistorg of Ou Old Oftenant, Eng. tr. 1859, iii. 4S- 
50 ; Noldeke, Ceter die AmaltkUer und einigt andere yaekbar- 
mller der Israditer, 1S64. 

J. Macphersox. 
>MJIM (cck), Jos 15^ only. — An unknown city 
of Judah, in the desert south of Beersheba. 

AM AN. — 1. CAfidf A) Is mentioned in Tobit's 
dving words as the persecutor of Achiacharus, 
To r4i*>. Cod. B, however, has 'Add/i ; k Xo3o^ ; 
Itala, Nabad; Svr. Ahab. Possibly the aUusion 
is to Haman and MordecaL 2. Est 12^ l&^K 
See Ham.\x. J. T. Mabshalu 

AMANA (^;=»<), Ca 4*. Probably the mountains 
near the river Abana or Amana, being connected 
with Hermon and Lebanon ; or else Mount 
Amanus in the north of Syria. 


AHARIAH (^r:?)?, '~n?* 'J" hath promised'). — 
1. 2 Ch 19^, high priest in the reign of Jehosha- 
phat, appointed by him chief justice ' in all matters 
of the Lord,' as Zebadiah, ' the ruler of the house 
of Judab,' was * in all the king's matters.' (Is this 
a precedent for the joint rule in later times of 
Zerubbabel and Joshua ?) 2, 3. In a genealogy in 
1 Ch 6'"^'- ^^^, Ezr 7*'', l>eginniug with Aaron and 
ending with Jehozadak at the Captivity, which 
seems as much intended to be a list of the high 
priests as 1 Ch S^**"" is of the kings of Judah, and 
which api>ears to be the basis of Josephus' very 
corrupt Ibts (Ant. VHI. i. 3, X. viii. 6), the name 
A. occurs twice — (o) 1 Ch G'-** grandfather of 
Zadok, and therefore a younger contemporary 
of Eli. Of this man we have no other record ; see 
Abiath.\e, {^) 1 Ch &\ Ezr 7^ 1 Es S^, 2 Es 1* 
(Amarias in Apocr.), son to the Azariah who is 
said to have ministered in Solomon's temple. If, 
as is probable, this remark applies to the previous 
Azariah, then this Amariah may be the same as 
No. 1. But great uncertainty hangs over these 
lists. In Ezr 7^'* six names are omitted, perhaps 
by homoioteleuton ; in the full list important 
names [e.g. Jehoiada, Zechariah, the Azariaihs con- 
temporary with Uzziah and Hezekiah respectively, 
L'rijah) are omitted; the succession 'Amariah, 

Aliitub, Zadok ' occurs twice ; only three high 
priests are given between Amariah under Jehosha- 
phat, and UUkiah under Josiali. 4. A priest clan, 
fourth in the list of 22 in Neh 12 (v.*), who ' went 
up with Zerubbabel ' ' in the days of Jeshua,' and 
in the list of 21 (v."), 'in the days of Joiakim,' 
and fiftli in the list of those who sealed to the 
covenant under Nehemiah (Neh 10*). This clan 
is probably identical with that of ' Immer,' the 
sixteenth course in David's time (1 Ch 24"), and 
one of the four families of priests mentioned in 
' the book of the genealogy of them which came up 
at the first' (Ezr '2P Neh 7**, Meruth 1 Es 5»*, 
A 'EftfiiipovO), and in the time of Ezra (Ezr 10*") ; 
see Abijah, No. 4. 5. 1 Ch 23»» 24^, a Kohathite 
Levite in Da\-id's time. 6. 2 Ch 31'*, a Levite in 
Hezekiah's time, one of the six assistants to Kore, 
'the porter at the east gate, who was over the 
freewill offerings of God.' 7. Ezr 10^, a man of 
Judah of the sons of Bani (1 Ch 9^), one of those 
who ' had taken strange wives.' 8. Neh 11*, a man 
of Judah, ancestor to Athaiah, who was one of those 
'that willingly offered themselves to dwell in 
Jerus.' 9. Zeph 1^, great-grandfather of the pro- 
phet, son to Hezekiah, perhaps the king. 

N. J. D. White. 
AMARIAS (A 'Afuiptos, B 'A^apOeiai), 1 Es 8-.— An 
ancestor of Ezra in the line of high priests, father 
of Ahitub. Called Amariah, Ezr 7'. 

AMASA (xjr?2. * burden ' or ' burden bearer '). — 1. 
The .«on of Ithra an Ishmaelite, and of Abigail the 
sister of king David. The first mention of him is 
in connexion with the rebellion of Absalom (2 S 
17^), who made him leader of his army. Joab, at 
the head of the king's troops, completely routed 
him in the forest of Ephraim (2 S 18®"*). David 
not only pardoned him, but gave him the command 
of the 'army in place of Joab (2 S ly). When 
he came to lead the royal forces against Sheba Mid 
his rebel host, he was treacherously slain by Joab 
at ' the great stone of Gibeon ' (2 S 20^^). 2. An 
Ephraimite who opposed the bringing into Samaria 
of the Jewish prisoners, whom Pekah, king of 
Israel, had taken in his campaign against Ahaz 
(2 Ch 2S^). R, M. Boyd. 

AMASAI (^s).—i. A Kohathite, 1 CIi G^^^, the 
eponym of a family, 2 Ch 29^*. 2. One of the 
priests who blew trumpets on the occasion of 
David's bringing the ark to Jems., 1 Ch 15**. 3. 
One of Davids otficers at Ziklag, 1 Ch 12^, pos- 
sibly to be identified with Amasa, No. 1. 

J. A. Selbie. 

AMASHSAI ('W?2, perhaps a combination of the 
reading 'srs;-, •k:>).^AV Amashai, Neh 11'^ A 
priest of the family of Immer. 

AMASIAH (.n;?C2.). — One of Jehoshaphat's com- 
manders, 2 Ch 17**. 

AMAZED. — Amaze has a much wider range of 
meaning in old Eng. than in modem. In conformity 
with its derivation [a-maze) it expresses confusion 
or perplexity, the restdt of the unexpected ; but 
this may give rise to a variety of emotions. 1. 
Fear : "Jg 20** ' WTien the men of Israel turned 
again, the men of Benjamin were a.' 2. AwE : Mk 
lO*"- 'And they were in the way going up to Jerus. ; 
and Jesus went before them, and they were a. ; 
and as they followed they were afraid.' 3. Excited 
WoxDER : Lk 5* ' they were all a.' (Gr. iKoroffu 
fKaSer aravras ; RV ' amazement took hold on 
all'). 4. Depbessiox -. Mk 14» '(Jesus) began to 
be sore a., and to be very heavy.' Amazement 
occurs twice in AV, the expression in Ac 3'" of 
great joy ; in 1 P 3* of great fear. 

J. Hastixgs. 



AMAZIAH (■"i.'VCIS, '•"»;?CJ5).— 1. The name of a 
king of Judah who succeeded his father Jehoash 
upon the assassination of the latter (c. 800. B.C.). 
Tlie chief interest of his reign centres in his wars 
with Edoni and with Israel (2 K 14, 2 Ch 25). In 
the first of these campaigns, Edom, which had 
revolted from Judah during the reign of Jehoram, 
the son of Jehoshaphat, sufl'ered a severe defeat 
in the Valley of Salt, and the capital Sela or Petra 
fell into the hands of the enemy (2 K 14^). Elated 
by this success, Amaziah challenged to a conflict his 
neighbour Jehoash, the grandson of Jehu. This 
powerful monarch showed no anxiety to try con- 
clusions witli his presumptuous rival, to whom he 
addressed the well-known parable of the thistle and 
the cedar (vv.*-^"). Amaziah, however, stung by the 
moral of this parable, refused to listen to the well- 
meant advice, and rushed blindly upon his fate. 
At the battle of Beth-shemesh the forces of Judah 
were utterly routed, and the king himself taken 
prisoner. Jehoash followed up his victory by 
capturing Jerxisalem, partially destroying its walls, 
pillaging the temple and the palace, and carrying 
back hostages to Samaria (vv. '!•"). How long 
Amaziah survived this humiliating defeat, it is not 
easy to decide. The statement (2 K 14") that 
he outlived Jehoash fifteen years can hardly be 
correct, and there seem to be sufficient reasons for 
considerably reducing the number of years (twenty- 
nine) assigned to his reign by the chronological 
system adopted in the Books of Kings. His reign 
appears to nave synchronised almost exactly with 
that of Jehoash, as that of his successor did with 
the reign of Jeroboam il. There is not a little 
plausibility in the conjecture of Wellhausen, that 
the conspiracy which issued in the murder of 
Amaziah at Lachish had its origin in the popular 
dissatisfaction with his wanton attack upon Israel 
which cost Judah so dear. The death of Amaziah 
should probably be dated c. 780 B.C., the year when 
there is reason to believe his son Azariah or Uzziah 
ascended the tlirone. 

Besides the strictly historical details which he 
borrows from 2 Kings, the Chronicler adds certain 
particulars, the purpose of whose insertion is 
evident (2 Ch 25«*- "•'*). (On these additions see 
Graf Die geschichtlichen Biicher des A.T. p. 157 ff., 
and Driver, LOT, p. 494.) 

2. The priest of Jeroboam il. who opposed and 
attempted to silence the prophet Amos when the 
latter delivered his message at the sanctuary of 
Bethel (Am 7^**-". See Amos). 3. A man of the 
tribe of Simeon (1 Ch 4'^). 4. A descendant of 
Merari (1 Ch 6"). 

J. A. Selbie. 

AMBASSADOR. -Three Heb. words are some- 
times tr. ' ambassador ' in RV of OT : 1. 'hkS'?, a 
general term for messenger, used for (a) messengers 
of private men (2 K 5^") ; {b) messengers of God = 
angels (see Angel) ; (c) messengers of kings or 
rulers = ambassadors (2 K I9», 2 Ch 35'-i), though 
sometimes tr. ' messengers ' in RV (Dt 2^, Nu 20'''). 
2. TV, apparently a synonym of 1 (Pr 13" ; cf. 25''), 
hence =nerald or messenger from court (Is 18'^ 
57*), and metai)horically an 'ambassador' of J" 
(Jer 49'*; cf. Ob v.'). In Jos 9* the reading of 
RVm is to be preferred. 3. f'^Si properly an 
interpreter, and so used in On 42^ ; cf. Job 33*^ (?) ; 
hence tf' in Is 43" (in theocratic sense) 'inter- 
preters' RV text, 'ambassadors' raarg.; in 2 Ch 
32'* ' ambas-sadors ' text, ' interpreters ' marg. 

Ambassadors were not permanent officials, but 
were chosen from attendants at court for special 
occasions (see 2 K 19"). Their evil treatment was 
regarded then as now as a grave insult to king and 
people (2 S 10''*). In the Apocr. the general term 
AyytXot, ' messenger,' is often used even in dealings 
with courts (Jth 1" 3', 1 Mac 1" 7"), but during the 


Maccabaean period, when embassies were frequently 
sent, the ordinary Or. words for ' ambassadors ' are 
employed: irpeaBevr-^s (1 Mac 13** 14-'-'-"), trpeff^evs 
( 1 Mac 9'"> 1 P 13'*), and jt/k a/SOrot (2 Mac 1 1«). The 
word irpeapela, ' ambassage ' (RV Apocr. ), occurs in 
2 Mac 4". In NT (Lk 14" 2 Co S'", Eph 6^) the 
use is metaphorical. G. W. Thatcher. 

AMBASSAGE, mod. embassy ; in AV only Lk 
W\ but KV adds Lk 19" (A V ' message ') where 
the same Gr. word (vpiapela) is used. The meaning 
is not a message sent by ambassadors, but the 
ambassadors themselves. In 1 Mac 14'^ the mean- 
ing is 'message' (Gr. X67ot, RV 'words'). 

J. Hastings. 

AMBER.— See Minerals. 

AMBUSH, from in (which becomes im before h, 
whence am) and boscus, a bush, wood, thicket, is 
used in various shades of meaning. 1. The abstract 
state of lying in wait in order to attack an enemy 
secretly. Jos 8'^ ' (Joshua) set them to lie in a. 
between Bethel and Ai.' 2. The place where the 
a. is set, or the position thus assumed. Jos 8^ ' Ye 
shall rise up from the a.' ; 1 Mac 9*" RV ' And they 
rose up against them from their a.' 3. The men 
that form the a. Jos 8'* ' the a. arose quickly out 
of their place ' ; Jer 51"^ ' prepare the ambushes ' (m. 
'liersin wait'). The mod. military term is am- 
buscade. Ambushment, meaning a body of troops 
disposed in ambush, is used in 2 Ch 13'^*"; also 
ambushm^nts in 2 Ch 20^- (RV 'liers in wait'; 
but RV gives ambushment in Jos 8* for 'lie in 
ambush,' and in Jg 9** for ' lying in wait'). 

J. Hastings. 

AMEN. — This word found its way bodily from 
the Heb. (jpn) into the Hellenistic idiom through 
the LXX, and strengthened its hold later on by 
its more copious use in the version of Symmachus. 
It is derived from fcx he propped, in Niphal (re- 
flexive) he was firm. So the adverb jck, firmly, 
came to be used, like our surely, for confirmation, 
in various ways. 

(1) It is used for the purpose of adopting as one^s 
own what Ims just been said (this answering sense 
being apparently the orig. one, Nu 5^) = 'so is it,' 
or ' so shall it be,' rather than the less compre- 
hensive ' so be it,' though ' so be it ' is occasionallj 
the prominent meaning (Jer 28*). The word is 
limited to the religious atmosphere, being, on 
human lips, an expression of faith that God 
holds the thing true, or will or can make it 
true. Thus after the 'oath of cursing,' recited 
in Nu S^, there is added, both in the orig. 
Hebrew and in the Greek of Sym., 'The woman 
shall say. Amen, Amen,' the word being doubled 
for empnasis ; where the LXX, however, has the 
inadequate yivoiro, yh-oiro, so be it, as is the case 
in nineteen out of the twentj'-three passages where 
the Heb. word occurs in this connexion : of the 
rest, three have duriv, and the fourth dXT/^wy. It is 
put also into the mouth of the people at the end of 
each curse uttered on Mount Ebal (Dt 27). At 
the close, likewise, ot public prayers, thanksgivings, 
benedictions, or doxologies tne people used to say 
Amen (Neh 8", Amen, Amen) ; not, apparently, 
however in the services of the temple, where the 
response was different (Edersheim, Temple Service, 
p. 127), but certainly in the services or the syna- 
gogue (Ps 41'3, e.g., and Schurer, HJPn. ii. 78, 82). 
That tins custom passed over from the synagogue to 
the Christian assemblies we gather from 1 Co 14**, 
where St. Paul speaks of rb dfnfjv, the (customary) 
amen uttered by the listeners at the close of the 
extempore thanksgiving. 

(2) It is used in confirmation of one^s own prayers, 
thanksgivings, benedictions, doxologies. Before 




NT the word occurs only at the end of a private 
prayer in To 8*, and at the end of a personal 
ascription in the last verses of 3 and 4 Mac. The 
personal doxological or ascriptional usage is much 
more frequent in NT (e.g. Ro 1^ 9*), and, outside St. 
Paul and the Apoc, it is the only NT usage. In 
St. Paul's Epistles the word sometimes concludes a 
prayer for, or a benediction upon, his readers ; but, 
except in Ro 15^ and Gal 6^, it is a later addition. 
Sometimes, as in Rev 1^, it is apparently intro- 
ductoru to a doxology, but is, in reality, confirma- 
tory of a previous doxology. So also in Rev 22* it 
is a belie\-ing acceptance of the previous diNine 

(3a) It is used once at the dose of an affirmation of 
Ofi^s otcn, to confirm it solemnly in faith : Rev l', 
where it is the trustful climax of the more limited 
waL, yea (the bare personal confirmation) : * Yea, 
verily [He shall so come].' (36) The use of Amen 
to introduce one's own words and clothe them with 
solemn affirmation may be called an idiom of 
Christ : it is a use confined entirely to Him in 
sacred literature. But the practice of the evan- 
gelists in this matter is not uniform. The Synopt- 
ists give invariably d/tij»' Xryw, the Fourth Gospel 
as invariably du^F d^rj^ Xiyw. Again, ilatthew is 
richest in the phrase, using it thirty times ; ilark 
less rich, using it thirteen times ; Luke least so, 
using it only six times ; elsewhere he gives narrower 
substitutes (a\i)dQi% thrice, i-v' dkridelas once, yal 
once), or more usually the simple X^w. The 
signal difference in Luke may be due partly to the 
non-Hebraic stamp of his readers. The double amen 
of introduction in John has its parallel elsewhere 
in the double amen of conclusion, instances of which 
have already been cited. But the invariableness 
of the doubling, as opposed to the invariableness 
of the single amen in the Synoptists, can be put 
down only to an idiosyncrasy of the writer, though 
he need not be unhistorical in all or even in many 
of his instances ; for it is worthy of notice that aJJ 
the savings in question are peculiar to John except 
13-1 (^j*^it Lk) and ^ (11 all Synopp., but Lk \tyu 
only). See Hogg in JQR Oct. 1896. 

But Christ's uniqueness in using it as a word of 
introduction runs parallel with the uniqueness of 
its connotation when He does use it. (o) It is never 
the expression of His own (accepting or expectant) 
faith ; it is rather an expression calling for faith : 
this \-iew is supported by the invariable accompani- 
ment \e-yu} vfup. 'He makes good the word, not 
the word Him' (Cremer, Worterbuch, 8th ed. pp. 
145, 146). (/3) Consef|uently, in His mouth, it has 

fenerally to do with His own person, either (a) as 
lessiah, or (6) as demanding faith in His Messiah- 
ship in spite of outward appearances and mistaken 
views : it points not merely to intellectual or 
eventual verity, but to the fact that either the 
thing is true in Him or He will make it or keep it 
true. So it is the amen of fulfilment in Him or bv 
Him, or the amen of paradox, or both (cf. Mt 5^^ 
jg-3 2V'\ 26"i^^ ajj^ other passages cited in Cremer). 
It is intelligible, therefore, how the evangelist-s 
preferred to leave d/tTjv untranslated ; for Luke's 
occasional oKT^dGn, like LXX yhxuro, is but a 
partial equivalent for what Christ meant by the 
word. See Nestle in Expos. Times, vMi. (1897) 190. 
(4) In close relation to Christ's usage, so under- 
stood, is the use of amen as a name or description 
of Christ and of God: of Christ, Rev y*, 'the 
Amen, the faithful and true witness' (cf. 2 Co 1*, 
where the yea, the promise, is in Christ, and the 
Amen, the ratification, is through Him) : of God, 
Is 65^* (twice), 'the God of the amen,' i.e. of faith- 
fulness and truth (if the Heb. adverbial points be 
correct : see Cheyne on the passage) ; LXX (in- 
adequately) : rhv debm rbf 6Xtf6u>6p (cf. dX^v6s and 
itiif. Rev 3^-"). J. MASSm. 

vou I. --6 

AMERCE. — Dt ^'3 'They shall a. him in 
(Driver, 'they shall fine him') an hundred 
shekeb of silver' ; and 2 Ch 36» RV ' and a<* (AV 
'condemned') the land in an hundred talents of 
silver.' In Ex 21'^, Am 2^ RV translates the same 
verb (»i:?) ' fine.' J. Hastings. 

AMETHYST.— See Stokes, (Precious). ' 

AMI ('c?=pDK Neh 7").— The head of a family 
of ' Solomon's servants,' Ezr 2^. 

AMIABLE ( = lovely, and now used onl^ of per- 
sons) is applied to God's dwelling-place m Ps 84^ 
' How a, are Thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts ' (RVm 
' lovely ' ; as at Ph 4* Rheims Bible has ' whatsoever 
amiable,' AV ' whatsoever things are lovely '). Cf. 
Howell (1644) ' They keep their churches so cleanly 
and amiable.' J. H.vstixgs. 

AMITTAI ('fCK •true').— Father of the prophet 
Jonah, 2 K U^, Jon 1^. 

AMITY, friendly relations between two nations, 
1 :Mac 12 « (RV ' friendship '). See Alliance. 

AMMAH (.T2>c), 2 S 2« only.— A hill near Giah, 
in the wilderness of Gibeon. It was probably to 
the east of Gibeon above the Jordan Valley, but 
the name has not been recovered. 


AMMI (-32=* my people," LXX Xoos iiov).—'The 
name which is to be applicable to Israel in the 
time of restoration ; Lo-ammi ( = not mv people), the 
name given in the first instance by Hosea to 
Gfomers third child, but in the prophetic fragment, 
Hos 1*-" [in Heb. 2-'], referred to the people of 
Israel, is, according to the author of the fragment, 
to be replaced by the name Ammi of exactly 
opposite import, in sign of the changed relation of 
the people to J". See Lo-Ammi. 

G. B. Gray. 

AMMIDIOI (B 'AfiftiStM, A, 'A/ifiiScuoi ; in Swete's 
text with the hard, but in Fritzsche's with the 
soft breathing; AV Ammidoi). — Of the three 
parallel lists (Ezr 2= Neh 7= 1 Es 5) which give the 
families which returned with Zerubbabel from 
captivity, that in 1 Es (5^) alone mentions the 
Ammidioi. It has been suggested that they are 
the men of Humtah (Jos 15** -T^cn, A Xaftfiard). It 
may be questioned whether either the Chadiasai or 
Ammidioi were mentioned in the original Heb. 
lists, for it is to be noticed that in the case of these 
alone is the gentUic form used ; otherwise through- 
out the list we have equivalent expressions of the 
Heb. ... "2, . . . 'r:K, e.g. viol ^6pos (v.*), ol « 
BeroXtw. G. B. GRAY. 

AMMIEL (Sx-23 'kinsman is God').— 1. Son of 
Gemalli, and spy of the tribe of Dan (Nu IS^^ P). 
2. Father of Machir (see art.), 2 8 9«- 17^. 3. 
According to the Chronicler, the sixth son of Obed- 
edom, who with his family constituted one of the 
courses of doorkeepers in the time of David; to 
them was allotted charge of the S. gate (of the 
temple) and the storehouse (1 Ch 26, esp. w. *•>*). 
Presumably, therefore, Ammiel was the name of 
a di\-ision of the doorkeepers in the time of the 
Chronicler— «. B.C. 300. Cf. Driver, LOT SOOt; 
Graf, Die Geschicht. Bitch, d. A.T. 213-247, esp. 
242 f., 246 f. ; Gray, Stud, in Heb. Proper Names, 
ch. iii. p. 49 ff. 4. 1 Ch 3'. See Eliam. 

G. B. Gray. 

AMMIHUD (-n.-r?3 'kinsman is majesty ').—!. 
An Ephraimite, father of Elishama (see art.), Nu 
110 21S 7^. 53 i(p (P)_ Presumably identical with A. 

* For folkr iTi frmrr i ^" ot the "■••"'"g of this name, and tha 
foOowing names beginninsr with Anmii, Bee Kaxxb, Pkofib. 




son of Ladan, 1 Ch 7". 2. A Simeonite, father of 
Shemuel (see art.), Nu 34* (P). 3. A Naphtalite, 
father of Pedahel (see art. ), Nu 34» ( P). 4. Accord- 
ing to the Kere of 2 S IS'" and the AV, A. was the 
name of the father of David's contemporary, the 
Geshurite king Talmai. The Kethibh, followed by 
IlV, reads Tin'oy — the closely similar letters n and n 
replacing n and i. Between the two readings it is 
difficult to decide; for while the Keri is better 
supported, the Kethibh, as a name occurring 
nowhere else in OT, is the harder reading. 6. Son 
of Omri, father of Uthai (1 Ch 9^). 

G. B. Gray. 
AMMIHUR (Tnnpy).— See Ammihud, No. 4. 

AHMINADAB (3-jVPB 'kinsman is generous,' or 
i)erhaps 'my iieople is generous,' B 'AfieivaSip, 
A 'AfuyaSd^ ; in NT Mt I'* (and Lk 3=»?) 'AfxivaSd^, 
whence the name in AV of NT is spelt Aminadab). 
—1. According to the genealogy in Ituth, which 
gives David's ancestry, Amminadab was son of 
Ram and father of Nahshon (Ru 4i'"=l Ch 2'», Mt 
1*) ; as father of Nahshon he is also mentioned in 
Nu V 2^ 7" 10" (P). Through his dau^'hter 
Elisheba he became father-in-law of Aaron, Ex Q'^ 
(P). 2. According to 1 Ch G-*^ A. was son of 
Koliath and father of Korah ; but in other state- 
ments about Kohath's children [e.g. Ex 6'*, Nu 3'", 
1 Ch 6^) A. is not mentioned ; moreover, elsewhere 
Izhar appears as son of Kohath and father of 
Korah (Ex ^^^■■\ 1 Ch G'*). There can be little 
doubt, therefore, that A. has accidentally replaced 
izhar in 1 Ch 6^ ; this may have arisen in compiling 
the list from a fuller list of the Kohathites which 
mentioned the connexion of A. (No. 1) with them. 
3. According to the Chronicler (1 Ch loi"- ") 
another A. was chief of a Levitical house in the 
days of David ; he is described as a son of Uzziel, 
who was one of the sons of Kohath (I Ch 6"). 

G. B. Gray. 

AMMINADIB (anj ^vl) occurs in AV and EVm of 
a very obscure passage, Ca 6'- ' my soul made me 
like the chariots of Amminadib.' ItV and AVm 
do not regard the term as a pr. name, but render 
' my soul set me on (RV among) the chariots of my 
willing (RV princely) people.' In Kautzsch's tr. 
of OT the passage is omitted from the text, and is 
rendered in a footnote, ' Mein Verlangen [ver-] 
setzste mich auf die Wagen meines Volkes, eines 
Edlen,' with the remark that it is quite imin- 
telligible in its present context. The great variety 
of interpretation and exegesis of the words will be 
found exhibited in Reuss' ^T, v. 391 ff. ; cf. Hitzig, 
d. Hohe Lied, 82 f., and comm. of Delitzsch, Ewald, 
Bottcher, ZiJcklcr, Oettli, etc. See Song of Songs. 

J. A. Sklbie. 

AMMISHADDAI (tc*'!?];? 'kinsman is Shaddai,' 
see God).— A Danite, father of Ahiezer (see art.), 
Nul>2 2'-»7««-'' 10^ (P). 

AMMIZABAD ("i^j'tpy 'kinsman (or, my people) 
has made a present'). — Son of Benaiah, for whom 
he appears at times to have officiated ; but the 
statement in the only pa.ssage (1 Ch 27") where he 
is mentioned is obscure, G. B. Gray. 

AMMON, AMMONITES C^n?, \^T'i^; in the 
inscrij)tions, Bit-AnunAn). — A people occupj'ing 
territory east of the Jordan, between the Anion 
on the south and ihe Jabbok on the north. The 
land Iving farther to the south, separated from 
them i)j' the Amon, was the possession of the 
Moabites. Before the arrival of tlie Israelites at 
the plains of Moab, the Anmionites had been driven 
back from the Jordan banks by an Amorite tril)e 
from the west under Sihon. These Amorites estab- 
lished a kingdom, carved out of the Ammonite terri- 
tories, with Heshbon as their capital. In this way 

a strip of land along the eastern bank of the river, 
varying in breadth from 20 to 30 miles, ceased to 
be regarded as belonging to the Ammonites, and 
was assigned to the transjordanic trilies of Reuben 
and Gad. The original territories of the Ammon- 
ites, extending from the Amon to the Jabl^ok, 
and reaching to the eastern bank of the Jordan, 
had in earlier years been held by a giant race 
called Zamzummim (Db 2'*"''^), to whom it seems 
that Og, king of Baslian, also Iwlonged (Dt 3"). 

As to the origin of the children of Ammon, an 
account is given in Gn 19^, which has been inter- 
preted by some as genuinely historical, and by 
others as a reminiscence of a certain family rela- 
tionship, coloured by bitter hostility and national 
hatred. The latter position is maintained by such 
distinguished and moderate exegetes as Dillmann 
and Bertheau ; but by them the niytli is regarded 
as historically justified, and indeed suggested, by 
the lustful cnaracter and irregular habits of the 
Ammonites. On the other hand, Delitzsch perti- 
nently asks how such an origin can be assigned to 
the narrative, seeinf' that their supposed descent 
from Lot is made the one ground for exceptional 
treatment of the Ammonites and Moabites (Dt 
29.13) -phg story of their origin certainly does 
not afford occasion for contemptuous or hostile 
treatment. This can l)e accounted for only by their 
unbrotlierly conduct towards Israel, which caused 
such delay and hardship on the eve of the entrance 
into the promised land (Dt 23"'). It appears to 
Delitzsch that the leAvdness and moral corruption 
which characterized their later history resulted 
from their tainted origin, rather than suggested 
the stoiy of that origin as given in our Scriptures. 
In any case, we must regard this notice as indicating 
a close relationship between the Ammonites and 
the Israelites. Tliat such a family connexion 
really did subsist between the two nations is con- 
firmed by the fact that almost all the names of 
Moabite and Ammonite persons and places that 
have come down to us are easily understood by 
the use of a Hebrew lexicon. From this circum- 
stance Kautzsch quite fairly concludes that these 
nations cannot be reckoned among the Arab tribes, 
but must have a place given them among the races 
allied to the Hebrews. 

The name by which they were first known was 
'children of Ammon.' Only in the literature of 
veiy late ages do we find the name Ammon used 
as the designation of the people (Ps 83"). In 
this very late, probably Maccabaean, psalm * (the 
only place in OT outside the I'ent. in which 
Lot's name is found), a list is given of ten tribes 
confederated in open and violent opposition to 
Israel at the re-dedication of the temple, in which 
the names of Amnion and Moab occur. It is then 
said of all these confederates that ' they have liolpen 
the children of Lot.' This latter designation is no 
doubt intended to apply to the Ammonites and 
Moabites. The meaning of the name Ben6-Ammi, 
literally ' sons of my people,' points to derivation 
from parents both of whom were of one race. 

The statement in Nu 21*^, that 'the border of 
the children of Ammon was strong,' t coming after 
a description of the destruction of the Amorites by 
the Israelites as reaching to that border, is under- 
stood by Kautzsch and others as indicating the 
reason why the Israelites did not carry their con- 
quests farther east, and as therefore opiwsed 
to Dt 2"*, Avhich makes Israel avoid conflict 
with the Ammonites in consetjuencc of a divine 
command. The earlier pjtssage, however, may 
be read as giving the reason why Sihon and his 

* See Ewald, History qf Israel, i. 312, and Che\-ne, Origin qf 
the P tatter, 1891, p. 97. 

t Dillmann and many others read here ijj" *Jn>er' for 
ip ' strong.' 




Aiuoriies had not pushed their conquests beyond 
this strip of land, \nth the possession of which they 
had rested satisHed. The Aiiuuonites had retreated 
before the Amorites within the natural fortresses 
of their inland mountain region. But though they 
had thus under compulsion abandoned the rruitful 
Jordan Valley, the Ammonites never ceased to look 
upon the whole sweep of country down to the river 
banks as rightfully theirs. Some 300 years after 
the conquest of the land by the Isr., the king 
of the Ammonites made the unreasonable claim 
that they should restore to him the country that 
had been taken so long before, not from his fore- 
fathers, but from their Amorite conquerors (Jg 
11"). This the Israelites, under the brave GUead- 
ite bhief Jephthah, refused to do, inflicting upon the 
Aminonites and their allies a most humiliating and 
crushing defeat. * Previous to this, for eighteen years, 
the Ammonites had harassed those who occupied 
the coveted district ; and so successful had they 
been in this that they were encouraged to venture 
across the Jordan, and there held in terror the war- 
like tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Ephraim. 
While this is reported primarily and mainly to 
show the depth to which the Israelites had sunk, 
it also afFords proof of the prowess and military 
importance of the Ammonites. 

When we next hear of them, in the early years 
of king Saul, the children of Ammon form a 
powerful nation under a capable ruler, king 
Naliash. One of the first distinctions in battle 
gained by Saul was his defeat of Nahash and the 
Ammonites, and the deliverance of the inhabit- 
ants of Jabesh-gilead, to whose citv thev had 
laid siege (1 S 11). The LXX text' here " reads 
that this conflict took place about a month after 
Saul had ascended the throne. During the earlier 

fart of the reign of David, hostilities between 
srael and Ammon ceased, because in the time 
of liis trouble, Nahash, either this same mon- 
arch or perhaps his successor, ' showed kindness to 
Da>id' (2 S 10=^). On the death of David's friend, 
messengers were sent to condole with his son 
Hanun, who, suspecting that they were spies, 
treated them infamously, so that David was obliged 
to enter upon a war to wipe out the insidt that 
had been put upon his ambassadors. The sense- 
less conduct of the Ammonite monarch evidently 
awakened among the Israelites all the old bitter- 
ness, so that in the hour of victory David and his 
men lost all control of themselves, and inflicted 
upon the vanquished children of Ammon the moat 
cruel and revolting barbarities (2 S 12'-*-3i). Their 
capital, Rabbath- Ammon, was taken by Joab, 
David's commander-in-chief, though he gave the 
honour to the king. This city (in Maccabsean 
times known by the name of Philadelphia), one of 
the ciries of the Decapolis, lay about 20 miles east 
of the Jordan, just outside the eastern border of 
the territory of Gad, at the southern spring of 
I he Jabbok, 

After the division of the kingdom, the country 
that had been taken from the Ammonites natur- 
ally fell with the rest of the transjordanic terri- 
tory to the nation of the ten tribes. The 
Ammonites, however, soon took advantage of 
the weakness of the dirided kingdom to assert 
again their independence. They also joined eagerly 
\rith the Assyrians in their attack on GiJead, 
obtaining increase of territory as the reward of 
their service; and subsequently, when Tiglath- 
pileser defeated the Reubenites* and Gadites, the 
Ammonites seem to have been allowed to reoccupy 
parts, at least, of their old territory on the 
banks of tlie Jordan (2 K 15^9, 1 Ch 'o^). The 
cruelty which they practised in the war against 

* Ace to some modem critics, however, Jg 1112-23 jj ji j^jg i^. 
terpolation (Moore, Jtidgei, p, 283X 

Gilead as allies of the Sjrians is described as having 
been committed with the object of getting their 
borders enlarged; and for this, and for their 
maUgnant exultation over Israel's fall, they are 
denounced by the prophets (Am 1", Zeph 2***, 
Jer 49^-^ Ezk 21"^^). We have a detaUed 
account (2 Ch 20) of hostilities between the Am- 
monites, at the head of a powerful confederacy, 
and the southern kingdom of Judah under Jehostia- 
phat. Great preparations had been made for this 
campaign, which was intended to be decisive ; but 
suspicions of treachery among the allies turned the 
arms of the panic-stric'ken hosts against one another 
in a great slaughter, so that the children of Judah 
did not require to draw a sword- 
After nearly 150 years we again find the Am- 
monites at war with Judah (2 Ch 27'), when they 
were thoroughly beaten by Jotham, and laid under 
a heavy tribute. During the years in which 
Judah was tottering on the verge of overthrow, 
the Ammonites appear amon^ the vassal tribes 
used by Babylon to harass and plunder those that 
had revolted from her sway (2 K 2-4-). After the 
overthrow of Judah, BaaUs, the king of the Am- 
monites, entertaining still the old unconquerable 
enmity towards the Jews, sent Ishmael, a man 
remotely connected with the royal family of 
Judah, who had been resident in the country of 
Ammon, to murder the popular and succe^fol 
governor Gedaliah, under whom the Jewish colony, 
consisting of those who remained in the land of 
Judah, had begun to prosper (2 K 25^'^, Jer 40^*). 
In the days of Nehemiah, the Ammonites were 
active in their opposition to the Jews, maliciously 
endeavouring to liinder the building of the walls of 
the city and the restoration of the temple (Neh 4). 
Three hundred years later, in the time of Judas 
Maccabeus, the Ammonites joined the Syrians 
against the Jews. The JeTilsh leader went tliough 
Gilead and inflicted a crushing defeat upon the 
Ammonites and their confederates under their com- 
mander Timotheus (1 Mac 5*). The Ammonites 
are referred to by Justin Martyr, about the middle 
of the second thristian cent., as even then a 
numerous people ; but not more than a century 
later Origen speaks vaguely of them, as of Moabites 
and Edomites, classing tliem all with the Arab 
tribes; and ynth this doubtful allusion they pass 
altogether out of history. 

The Ammonites seem to have been notorious 
among the nations for their cruelty. Their religion 
was a genuine reflection of this infamous national 
characteristic. Their chief deity was Molech or 
Milcom(l Kir-»). 

Ammonitess (n'ps), woman of Anunon, 1 K 14"- ", 
2 Ch 12" 24» 

LiTEBATTBX. — Kaotcsch in Biehm, Eandi£6rteTb*ck, 18S4, 
pp. 55, 56 — an admirable and comprebensiTe sketch. See 
Dillmann aud Delitzsch on Gn 19^ in their CoinmentarieB ; 
Ewald, History of Israel, iL London, 1876, pp. 295, 338, 393 ff. ; 
UL 1878, p. 24, etc. ; Ebrard, Apologai^ Bdin. 1SS7, ii. 349-361. 

J. Macphebsos. 

AMNON (pi:;x). — i. Eldest son of David bv 
Ahinoam the Jezreelitess. He dishonoured his half- 
sister Tamar, and was, on that account, slain by her 
brother Absalom (2 S 3^ 13"-). In 2 S IS** he is c^ed 
Aminon (pj'cjt), supposed by many (on the analogy of 
Arabic) to be a diminutive form, purposely use^ by 
Absalom to express contempt ; possibly it is only 
a clerical error. 2. Son of Shimon (1 Ch 4"^). 

J. F. Stexxixg. 

AMOK (rcjj 'deep'). — A priestly family in the 
time of Zerubbabel and oi Joialam, Nek 12'- *• 
See Gexealogy. 

AHON d'Sif, }CK ' a skilled, or master workman,' 
Pr S=* RY).— 1. One of the kings of Judah, son and 
successor of Manasseh. Two parallel accounts of 
his reijni are jriven in 2 K 2P^^ and 2 Ch 33-*-^' 




His name occurs in the "onealogical list of the 
house of David, I Ch 3", and in tliat of the 
ancestry of our Lord, Mt 1'". It is also men- 
tioned in connexion with his son Josiah in Jer P 
25\ Zeph V. 

A. came to the throne at the a^e of twenty-two, 
and his reign lasted two years (041-63S) B.C.). It 
has been supposed that his name may have had 
some connexion with the Egyp. divinity Araon 
(see Thebes), and may thus be an illustration of the 
extent of his father's heathen sympathies. There 
i«, however, no other evidence that in his culti- 
vation of foreign forms of worship Manasseh was 
definitely influenced by Egypt, and the name A. 
may quite well be Hebrew. 

All that we know of A. is that during his short 
reign he repeated all the idolatrous practices of his 
father's earlier years. He had been unalliected by 
Manasseh's tarcfy repentance and futile attempts 
at reform, and when he came into power he gave 
full scope to the heathen proclivities with which 
his youthful training had imbued him. The 
state of matters under A. may be inferred partly 
from the fact that ' he walked in all the way that 
his father walked in, and served the idols that 
his father served, and worshipped them ' (2 K 
21-'), paitly from the evils that were found 
rampant at the time of Josiah's reformation (2 K 
23''"'^, 2 Ch 34^"'), and partly from the description 
which the prophets Zephaniah and Jeremiah give 
of the religious condition of Judah in the begin- 
ning of Josiah's rei^ (Zeph l*"" 8-» 31-8, Jer 2-6). 
An Asherah stood in the house of the Lord ; 
incense was burned to Baal ; the sun, moon, and 
stars were worshipped ; idolatrous priests were 
maintained ; and the name of Malcam was held as 
sacred as that of J". Perhaps even human sacri- 
fice was not discontinued. Idolatry in religion 
was accompanied by lawless luxury, and by the 
corruption of morals in every part or society. The 
rulers were violent, the judges rapacious, the 
prophets treacherous, and the priests profane. 

A. was slain by conspirators, and was buried in 
the new burial-place in the garden of Uzza, where 
his father also lay. He was not the victim of a 
popular revolt, but of a palace intrigue ; for the 
people slew his murderers, and set his son Josiah 
on the throne. It is possible that the plot against 
A. may have been connected Avith some attempt at 
religious reform, like the revolt of Jehu against 
Jehoram of Israel. If this was so, the attempt 
was a failure, and the popular reaction in favour 
of idolatry was strong enough to delay the revival 
of J"'s worship for nearly twenty years. But the 
record is so meagre that this must remain mere 
matter of conjecture. 

LiTERATCRE.— For the last point, see Kittel, Hist, of Heb. il. 
378 f. There is a reading by one of the hands in the Alex. MS of 
the LXX which gives twelve years instead of two as the length 
of A. '8 reign. This has been defended as authentic by George, 
Duke of Manchester (The Times of Daniel, London, 184.5), on 
Sounds of prophetical chronology, in which he is partly 
supported by Kbrard (SK, 1847, iii. 652 fl.). For the other side, 
see Theniiis, Vie Biicher der Kimige, in loc., and the note in 
Ewald {Qetchichte, B. 3. 8. 715 ; Eng. tr. iv. 200). 

2. A governor of Samaria in the days of Ahab, 
mentioned in 1 K 222« (pK) and 2 Ch 18^ (|iDK). 
The prophet Micaiah was given into his custody 
when Ahab set out with Jehoshaphat on his fatal 
attempt against Ramoth-gilead. The LXX has 
some singular variations on this name. In 1 K he 
appears as ^^eixrjp ri>v ^acriX^a TTJs w6\ews (or ace. to 
another reading 'Apifiuv rbv Apxavra). In 2 Ch he 
is 'EmV (also ZtTi^trjp) dpxovra. Josephus calls him 
'Axd/Muv. (See ZATIV, 1885, S. 173 fV.) 3. 'The 
children of A mon' (pc^) are mentioned in Neh 7** 
among ' the children of Solomon's servants,' in the 
list of those who returned from the Bab. Exile 

with Zerubbabel and Jeshua. In the parallel list 
in Ezr (2") the name appears as Ami ('i?^). 4. 
Amon (god). See Thebes, 

James Patrick. 
AMORITES (nbKn 'the Amorite').— The name 
has been supposed to signify ' mountaineer ' ; but 
the two Heb. words 'Smer and 'dinir, by which the 
signification is supported, mean 'summit' and 
'tower,' noc 'mountain.' In the Bab. and Assyr, 
texts, as well as in tlie Tel el-Amarna tablets, the 
name is written Amurra, ' the Amorite,' the country 
being Amurri ; the Egyp. form is Amur, ' Amorite.' 
Syria and Pal, were known to the Semites of 
Babylonia as ' the land of the Amorite ' as far back 
as the time of Sargon of Akkad (B.C. 3800), and the 
Sumerian name Martu (whicli lias been connected 
with that of the Plujcn. city Marathus and moun- 
tain Brathy) is probably a modification of Amurrft, 
According to an early Bab. geograpliical list 
{WAI iL 50. 50), Sanir (the Senir of Dt 3») was 
a synonym of Subartum or northern Syria. In 
Sumerian times ' the land of the Amorites ' was 
also known as Tidnim or Tidanu. 

In the age of the Tel el-Amama tablets (B,C. 1400) 
and of the Nineteenth Egyp. Dynasty (B.C. 1300) 
'the land of tlie Amorites' denoted the inland 
region immediately to the north of the Pal. of later 
days. In many passages of the OT, however, the 
Amorites appear as the predominant population of 
Canaan, and accordingly (as in the cuneiform 
inscriptions) give their name to the inhabitants of 
the whole country (see 2 S 2P, Am 2»-"'), The 
Hivites of Gn 34-, Jos 9^ 11'* are Amorites in Gn 
4822, 2 S 212 ; the Jebusites of Jos 15«3 1828, Jg 1*1 
19", 2 S 58 24'8 are Amorites in Jos 10»-« (cf. Ezk 
16^) ; and the Hittites of Hebron in Gn 23 take 
the place of the Amorites of Mamre in Gn 14'^ 
Strictly speaking, however, according to Nu 13®, 
while the Amalekites, or Bedawin, dwell in the 
desert to the south, and the Canaanites in the coast- 
lands of Phoenicia and the valley of the Jordan, 
' the Hittites and the Jebusites and the Amorites 
dwell in the mountains. ' 

Amorite kingdoms also existed to the south and 
east of Palestine. In early days we hear of 
Amorites to the south-west of the Dead Sea (Gn 
14^ cf. Dt V- «), but at the time of the Exodus 
their two chief kingdoms were those of Sihon and 
Og, on the ea,stern side of the Jordan (Dt 31*, 
Jos 2'"). Og ruled in Bashan, Sihon more to the 
south, where he had driven the Moabites from the 
fertile lands between the Jabbok and the Amon 
(Nu 21"- 28). The overthrow of Sihon and Og, 
and the occupation of their territories, were among 
the first achievements of the Israelitisli invaders of 
Canaan (Nu 212'-^). A fragment of an Amorite 
song of triumph over the conquered Moabites is 
given in Nu 212^"^, where it is turned against the 
conquerors themselves. 

W hether the Amorite kingdoms were the result of 
conquest, or whether the Amorites represented the 
original population of the country east of the Jordan, 
we do not know. A still more tliJlicult problem is 
the relation between the Amorites and Hittites in 
southern Palestine. That the two peoples were 
interlocked there, we know from the statement 
of Ezk (16') in regard to the double pareutajio 
(Amorite and Hittite) of Jerusalem, In the north, 
in ' the land of the Amorites* of the cuneiform and 
E^p, inscriptions, the interlocking was due to 
Hittite conquest. Before the reign of Tahutmes ill, 
of the Eighteenth Egyp, Dvnasty (B.C, 1504-1449), 
the Amorite stronghold of Kadesh on the Orontes 
had been captured by the Hittites, and had become 
their southern capital. The Hittites, however, 
were intruders from the north. 

On the Egyp. monuments the Amorites are de- 
picted as a tall race, with fair skins, light (also 

black) hair, and blue eyes (Tomkins, Jrl. of the 
Anthropological Institute, xviiL 3, p. 224). They 
thus resembled the Libyans (the Berbers of to- 
day), and belonged to the white race. The 
same type, with profiles resembling those of the 
Amorites on the Egyp. monuments, is still met with 
in Pal., especially m the extreme south. The 
tall stature of the Amorites impressed the Israel- 
ites (Nu 13**- » Dt 2i«-" 92, it the Anakim are 
to be regarded as Amorites). Amorites from time 
to time settled in Egypt, and became naturalised 
subjects of the Pharaoh. Thus, in the reign of 
Tahutmes in. , the sword-bearer of the king and his 
brother, a priest, were sons of an 'Amorite' and 
his wife Karuna. 

In the age of the Tel el-Amama correspondence, 
the Egyp. governor of the 'land of the Amorites' 
was AM-Asherah (written Abd-Asirti and Abd- 
Asratu), who, ■with his son Ezer (Aziru), made 
successful war against Rib-hadad, the governor of 
Phcenicia, eventually driving him from his cities 
of Zemar and Gebal. Aziru seems to have been 
assisted by the forces of Babylon and Aram-nalia- 
raiiii (Mitanni). In some of his despatches to the 
Pharaoh he describes the Hittites as advancing 
southward, and as having captured Tunip and other 
Egyp. towns in northern Syria. The kingdoms 
of Og and (probably) Sihon did not as yet exist, 
' the field of Bashan ' (Ziri-Basana) being under 
the Egyp. governor Artama-Samas. One of the 
letters is from the king to the governor of ' the citv 
of the Amorites,' and orders certain Amorite rebefe 
to be sent in chains to the Pharaoh, whose names 
are Sarru, Tuva, Leya, Yisvari (or Pisvari), the son- 
in-law of ^lanya, DJisarti, f*al&ma, and Nimmakhfi. 
AL- 'ut a century and a half later, Merenptah, the 
son and successor of Ramses II. , built a town in the 
land of the Amorites (Anast. iiL Bev. 5), and one of 
the chief officials at his court was Ben-Mazana, the 
son of Ynpa'a or Yau ' the great,' from Ziri-Basana. 
But we do not know whether Bashan was at the 
time under Amorite rule. 

LiTERATCBB.— Saycc, 'The White Race of Ancient Palestine,' 

■r. •; Ejpog. July 1SS8 ; Races qf tk* OT (1691 K 

A. h: Sayce. 
AMOS (:^=^).— 

I. The Prophet 
IL The Prophecy. 

1. Authenticity. 

2. Contents. 

3. Theology. 

4. Style. 
III. Literature. 

I. The Prophet. — This is the name of the 
prophet whose book in our Bibles * occupies the 
third place amongst the ilinor Prophets.t The 
Gr. and Lat. Fathers, being for the most part 
unacquainted with Heb., frequently confounded 
his name with the quite difTerent one of Isaiah's 
father, Amoz. Our prophet has no namesake in 

* The same order is observed in our editions of the Heb. 
Bible, but in the T.TX Amos follows Hosea. The same is the 
case in the Syriac Lives of the Prophets. Greg. Kaz. says — 

M>W> uit ilrii it ypt^xi tt iMt*m 

t The name has been very variously explained. Jerome, in 
his preface to Jcel, understands it as meaning one vho bears a 
load, but in the preface to Amos he makes it eqaivalent to the 
people that i* torn asunder. EnsebiiH gives Uie altematires 
strottg, faithful, tearing the peopb aswtder. A Babbinical 
tradition asserts that * the prophet was called Amos because he 
was heavy (=Heb. 'amoi) of tongue,' and represents the Lord 
as saying, ' I sent Amos, and they called him stammerer.' The 
Rabbis ascribed the same physical infirmity to Moses, Isaiah, 
and Jeremiah. Gesenius {This. 1014) was disposed to seek an 
Egj-p. etj-mology, comparing such familiar E^yp. f<xins as 
Amosis, Amagii. But the most probable view is that which 
traces it to the verb 'aauu (=to bearX and looks on it as mean- 
ing burden-bearer ot burdened. The attempt at exirianation is 
carried too far when it is sii^gested that the name was imposed 
by the child's parents because of the heavy load of poverty 
which he was doomed to carry. 

the OT.* It is almost certain that he was a 
Judsean by birth : Am V is not ateolutely de- 
cisive, but taken in conjunction with 7" it seems 
to prove that he was a citizen of the southern 
kingdom. The attempts which have been made 
to prove his northern origin from the spelling of 
certain words (4" o" 6*- ^* 8') must be pronounced 
failures. He owned a smaiU flock of a ]>ecnliar 
breed of sheep, ngly and short-footed, but valuable 
for their excellent wool [cf. 2 K 3*, the only other 
passage where the word noked (Am 1') occurs]. 
These he pastured in the neighbourhood of Tekoa, 
in the wilderness of Judah. (See Tekoa.) Part 
of his liveliliood was derived from the lightly- 
esteemed fruit of a few sycomore trees (7"). ms 
owTi account of himself (7^*-^) gives us the impres- 
sion that, though poor, he was independent, and 
able, when occasion demanded, to leave his flock 
for a while. This is more probable than the sup- 
position that he brought his sheep with him from 
Tekoa to Bethel. It is extremely likely that his 
father had followed the same occupation, for in 
the East avocations are hereditary. The omission 
of the fathers name in the superscriprion of the 
prophecy would seem to indicate that he did not 
belong to a distinguished fanuly (contrast Is 1', 
Jer II, Ezk l\ Hos IS Joel l^ etc.). A worth- 
less Je\s-ish tradition makes the wise woman of 
Tekoa (2 S 14) to have been his grandmother. 

In his day it was still common for those who 
appeared as prophets to come forth from circles 
voiere the practices and influences cherished were 
of such a nature as to prepare men for this high 
oftice. But he was doing his ordinary work when 
the impulse came which brought him to Bethel, 
the ecclesiastical capital of the N. kingdom, there 
to denounce the sins of Israel. God called him, with- 
out any intermediary (7^* ; cf. Gal P), and the call 
came with a constraining force which left no choice 
but to foUow (3®). External events, no doubt, had 
their influence. It is impossible to read the book 
without feeling how deeply A. had been im- 
pressed by the westward movement of the Assyr. 
colossus, and we may reasonably believe that the 
campaigns prosecuted in this direction by Salma- 
nassar m. (7S3-773 B.C.), or by Assurdanil (773- 
755 B.C.), had excited his alarm. The note of time 
P, ' two years before the earthquake,'does not afford 
much help in dating his mission. Zee 14* assigns 
this earthquake to the reign of Uzziah of Judah ; 
and Jerome, on Am P, makes bold to identify it 
with the one which Josephus {Ant. VS.. x. 4) asserts 
to have occurred as a punishment of Uzziah's 
sacrilege : ' (^uando iram Domini non solum pcena 
ejus, qui sacniegus fuit, sed et terras motus ostendit, 
quem Hebrsei tunc accidisse commemorant. ' Am 1' 
fixes the prophet's activity in the period when 
Jeroboam II. of Israel was contemporaneous with 
Uzziah. This period extended from 775 to 750 
B.C. The tone of the prophecy leaves little doubt 
that, when it was delivered, the bulk of Jeroboam's 

* Our English Bibles, agreeing in this with the majority of 
modem VSS, mentitn a aeoood Amos. Thk is in St. Luke's 
account of the genealogy of Joseidi, the putative father of our 
I»rd, Lk 3&^. There is, however, some rmcenainty as to 
whether the correct form is not Amoz. The Gr. 'Auw; is not 
deciaiTe, since it is used in the LXX indifferently for pCK 
(Is 11) and stay (Am l^X l^edsely as ieiotoB has Amos in 
both cases. The Peshitta also &ils to help as. Whereas it 
txaosliterates the propbefs name «rf)nV)S and that <rf 
Isaiah's father «QLD|, at Ue S* it ccMnbines the two forms 

♦ OV^S. Delitzst^and SaUdnson, in their Hd>. A'ew Testa- 
meats, decide in favour ol Amoz, both giving pcx. The 
question is not important. In any case we know nothing con^ 
ceming the person named, and 'it is not possible to do mete 
than state the negative conclusion that he cannot have been 
either the prophet of Tekoa or the father ot Isaiah, seeing he is 
removed from Joseph by an interval of only seven gene.-atioos. 



splendid achievements hod already been wrought. 
The ministry of Amos sliould therefore be dated 
about TOO B.C. An attempt has reccntlj' been made, 
on the ground of internal evidence, to brin^' it 
down a quarter of a century, and date it about 734. 
This, however, would require us to set aside Am7"*'", 
a section which bears every mark of verisimilitude. 

Bethel was the principal scene of his preachinjj, 
perhaps the only one. When he had delivered 
several addresses there, Amaziah, the chief priest 
of the royal sanctuary, sent a message to the 
king, who docs not seem to have been present, 
accusing the preacher of treason, and at the 
same time ordered the latter to quit the realm. 
Evidently there was some reason to fear that the 
oppressed poor might bo stirred up to revolt against 
their lords and masters. The tnreats of coayng 
judgment would disturb many hearers. The 
denunciation of cruelty and injustice would awake 
many echoes. Yet the priest's language evinces^ 
all tiie contempt which a hi'^hly-placed official 
feels towards an interfering nobody, a fellow who, 
as he thinks, gains a precarious livelihood by 
prophesying. Jeroboam does not seem to have 
paid much need. In the Bab. Talm. Pesachim, fol. 
87ft, it is said : ' How is it proved that Jeroboam 
did not receive the accusation brought against 
Amos? . . . The king answered [in reply to 
Amazialil. Cdd forbid that that righteous man 
should have said this ; and if he hath said it, what 
can I do to him ? The Shechinah hath said it to 
him.' The conversation is fictitious; but Amos 
doubtless withdrew unmolested, after disclaiming 
any official and permanent standing as a prophet, 
predicting Amaziah's utter destruction because of 
his impious hindrance of the divine word (7^^'^^), 
and completing the delivery of his own message to 
Israel (8. 9). On reaching liome he doubtless put 
into writing the substance of his speeches, and the 
roll thus written is the earliest book of prophecy 
that has come down to us. 

Concerning his subsequent fortunes we are 
entirely in tlie dark. A late Christian tradition, 
originating probably in the 6th century of our 
era, affirms that Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, 
struck him freouently, and treacherously abused 
him, and finally Amaziah's son killed him, 
striking him on the forehead with a club, because 
he had rebuked him for the apostasy of worship- 

{)ing the two golden calves. The prophet survived 
on" enough to reach his own land [another version 
adds, 'at the end of two days'], and was buried 
with his fathers. It is much more likely that 
he reached Tekoa in peace, resumed his shep- 
herd life, and eventually was gathered to liis 
fathers. Jerome and Lusebius attimi that his 
sepulchre was still shown at Tekoa in their days. 
WTien Maundrell was in the neighbourhood in 1737 
he was told that the tomb was in the village on 
the mountain. The Roman Churcli places Amos 
amongst the martyrs, and commemorates him on 
the 31st March, the Gr. Church on the loth June. the Jews his freedom of speech gave 
oflfence even after his death, for the Koh. Jiab. 
blames Amos, Jeremiah, and Ecclesiastes for their 
fault-finding, and states that this is the reason why 
the superscriptions to their books run, ' The words 
of Amos,' etc., and not, ' The words of God.' 
II. TnK Prophkcy. 

I. The Authenticity oi the writing which bears 
his name has never been seriously questioned. As 
to its integrity there is good ground for thinking 
that the following passages are later additions : 
11. 2 04. 3 413 5c. 9 62 93. 8-ij, Emendations of the Mns- 
sorctic text have been suggested for the under- 
mentioned passages, and most of them merit careful 
consideration: !'••" 2'^ 41. 2. s 58. 9. n. 12. 

16. 2« Q-i. 8. 10. 13 -1. 2. •». 14. 17 J^rt Qrt. 10. 11 


2. The Contents may be summarised thus :— Chs. 
1 and 2 : The iNxnoDUCTlON, which touches on the 
sins, first of the neigiibouring nations and then of 
Israel, and announces their imminent punishment. 
Chs. 3-C: The First Main Divisiox of the 
Book; Z-A^ A Minatory Discourse, addressed chielly 
to the ruling classes; 4^-" A Continuation of the 
same Speech, now directed to the people in general, 
detailing the judgments by which God had sought 
to bring tliem back to Himself, and sharply 
pointing out that a more decisive stroke was at 
hand ; b:A Second Address, in which are contained 
lamentations, reproofs, exhortations to true religion 
as opposed to false, threats of ruin and captivity ; 
6 : A Woe upon the Luxurimts, the Self -Conjiaent, and 
the Proud. Chs. 7-9 : The Second Main Division 
OF THE Book ; V'^ Three Visions ; i"'-'^ The Narra- 
tive of the Expidsion of Amos ; 8''* A Fourth Vision, 
the rest of the chapter being occupied M-ith de- 
nunciations of the extortionate traders, the st-lf- 
indulgent rich, the superstitious pilgrims ; 9 : The 
Concluding Vision: Tne Inevitable Punishment of 
Wrong-doers : The Messianic Future. 

3. The distinguishing characteristics of this 
prophet's Theology are quite unmistakable : — 

(1) His Idea of God. — Amos was an uncom- 
promising monothelst. There is not a verse in his 
writings that admits the existence of other deities. 
But his conviction of the divine unity was not 
the result of philosophic thought and argument. 
It was an immediate certainty springing out of 
his deep sense of J"'s righteousness, nearness, 
greatness. So near and so mighty did He seem 
that there was no room for other gods, and hence 
there is no discussion of their claims. J" is all- 
powerful in Heaven and Sheol, on Carrael and in 
the depths of the sea, in Caphtor and Kir, and 
Edom and Tyre. His might is shown in the 
control of human history (chs. 1 and 2, passim ; 5-^ 
6" 9''), and esp. in His guidance of the fortimes of 
Israel. Every movement of the national life, 
spiritual and external, has been under His hand 
(2^-11). In all the affairs of men there is no such 
thing as chance ; it is His purposes that are con- 
stantly being wrought out : calami^, as well as 
prosperity, comes from Him (.S^''*). iiThis implies 
His dominion over Nature, the cOTlpleteness of 
which comes out in such sections as 4*"**', Mhcre 
every natural calamity and scourge, dearth, 
drought, mildew, locust, pestilence, is traced to 
the direct exercise of His will. It scarcely need 
be added that the personality of God was clear to 
the prophet's mind. Hence it is that he does not 
shrink from anthropomorphism : J " steps forth 
against the house of Jeroboam like an armed 
warrior (7") ; in pity for His people He changes 
His purposes (7^ etc.). 

(2) The relation bcticcen J" and Israel. — In 
common with all his countrymen, Amos believed 
that J" was in a peculiar sense their Go<l, and 
they His people. But they regarded the bond as 
a natural and indissoluble one, like that which 
was conceived to exist between other nations and 
their deities, so that, provided they paid His duea 
in the form of sacrifices, He was bound in honour, 
and for His own sake, to protect and Ijless them. 
The prophet, on the contrary, insisted that the 
relation was a moral one, not merely dissoluble, 
but certain to be dissolved if they fell below His 
standard of moral requirements. It is in the 
insistence on this, and in the statement of those 
moral requirements, that the splendid originality 
of Amos is most clearly evinced. Ceremonial wor- 
ship has no intrinsic value (o-^'^) : the only genuine 
service of God consists in justice and righteousness 
(S'") ; when immorality and oppression are practised 
by His worshippers, God shrinks from contact with 
them as from a defilement : inhumanity and 



unbrotherliness, nay even the failure to respect the 
sentiments of others iF-2^), are hateful to Him 
when heathens are guilty of them, and much more 
so when Israel is (3-). As to the illegitimate 
ni.rlio,]-; of worshipjun^ tEe_L6rily hfr - na tK-tmli,' 
V. <\y ; 3^* 4* 8'^ sKowthe scorn with 

^ 'gardeti them. But it is the spirit, not 

the mtiliuJ, which finds in him so stem an anta- 
gonist. His main contention is that ritual, as a 
substitute for the social virtues, is an abomination. 
True religion consists in doing good and abstaining 
from hann. As in the Epistle of St^ .Tnn^^ti pthio al 
considerations are paramount, pigli teQn an p;<j i g 
the kej-note of the prophecy. The word Love 
does not occur. This bent was due primarily to his 
apprehension of the diWne character. God, to him, 
was the God of Righteousness rather than of Love. 
Xot, of course, that the sense of the Divine Love 
is absent ; ch. 7^"" is a picture of the placableness 
which j-ields to the prophets intercession, even at 
the moment when the stroke of punishment is 
falling. But in this particular Amos stands far 
below Hosea. The circumstances of the time 
helped to fix his view. Jeroboam's victories had 
brought wealth and power to the upper classes, but 
had left the poor worse oft" than of old. The 
basest advantage was taken of this ; the -wicked 
meanness of the powerful provoked Amos to con- 
tempt -J '. Without being what is now called a 
sociali>t — for, indeed,^ he was in no respect a 
theorist — he felt deeply the rottenness of the social 
state ; the dignity of man vas being trampled on ; 
the prevalent luxury was founded on oppression, 
and was sapping the life of those who practised it.' 
He attacks this luxury unsparingly (6*'*) ; evMi 
the custom of reclining at meals, recently introduced 
from the farther East, is twice rebuked (3^^ p^). 
The peasant, as well as the prophet, may be felt 

(3) The Coming ^Judgment,— -The Book of Amos 
is the earliest writing in which the term •' The 
Day of J " is used. Most probably it was current 
on the people's lips. They imagined that when 
the Lord arose in judgment it would be, not only 
for the establishment of His rule over the whole 
world, but also to their great benefit ; all their 
sufferings would come to a perpetual end ; dominion 
as large as David's would be restored to Israel. 
^Amos saw that this ' Day ' threatened to be one of 
judgment on Israel itself (5^'"*), and its coming 
appeared so inevitable that he speaks of it as 
already present. Uidike his predecessors, he looks 
on the resrdt as totally destructive of the common- 
wealth (2»-is 31--" 42- 3. 12 527 g passim, 7« 9i-«- '). 
Repentance would have averted thLs (4), but the 
opportunity has passed. The gnreat world-power 
which will ser\e as God's instrument is doubtless 
Assj-ria, but the prophet stops short of the mention 
of its name (.5"-'^ 6^^). Perhaps he was aware of the 
weakness under which the Eastern colossus then 
laboured, but believed that it would stand firmly 
on its feet again. 

(41 The Messianic picture in 9-"^\ — One of the 
■\v. Lhtiest reasons for regarding this as a later 
aaation is its incongruousness with the Visions of 
Judgment which have preceded. It shows us the 
land entirely purged of the sinners, the rich 
officials who had abused their power. The Davidic 
kingdom is restored, no stress, however, being 
laid on the person or character of the prince at its 
head. The ancient bounds of the empire are 
re-established, foreigners, especially the hated 
Edomites, being reduced anew to subjection. The 
Israelite exiles have been brought home, and have 
rebuilt the waste cities. AgricuJture and vine-grow- 
ing flourish to a miraculous degree on a soU of 
immensely increased fertUitv. Israel has reached 
an eartlily paradise, and will never be dispossessed. 

This is a picture which would have commended 
itself to the men who heard Amos, as his genuine 
predictions did not. One point there is in common: 
everything is human and earthly, there is no trace 
of expectation of a future life. 

In so early a -writer as Amos it is surprising to 
meet -with so few signs of sympathy with the 
modes of thought and expres^^ion which were 
afterwards abandoned by the higher religion of the 
OT. At 7" he appears to share in the common 
i dea tha t other lands are unclean to an Israelite. 
At a^ he a3opts the widespread myth of a dan- 
gerous serpent inhabiting the' sea," the creature, 
perhaps, which the dwellers on the Mediterranean 
coast -lands conceived of as s-wallowing, each 
evening, the setting sun. At 5* (a disputed 
passage) there is prote.bly a mythical idea involved 
in the mention of the constellation of ' The Fool.' 
(See art. Oriox. ) At 6'° (another disputed passage) 
the superstitious dread of pronouncing the divine 
name amidst inauspicious surroundings is referred 
to -without reproof. 

4. There was a time when Jerome's verdict on 
the Stt/le of Amos, imperifus sermons, sed non 
scientid, was generally acquiesced in. Now, 
however, it is seen that the Christian Father was 
prejudiced by his Jewish teacher, and that the 
prophet was as little deficient in style as in know- 
ledge. In point of fact, he is very little inferior to 
the best OT writers. His language is clear and 
vigorous ; his sentences are well rounded. His 
imagery, mainly drawn, as was to be expected, 
from rural life (threshing-sledges, waggon, harvests, 
grasshoppers, cattle, birds, lions, fishing), is vi-vid 
and telling. He knows how to use the refrain (4), 
and the poetic lament (5-) ; he is skilful in working 
up to a climax. Two or three solecisms in spelling 
may well be set do\vn to transcribers. An Eastern 
shepherd is not necessarily uncultivated, though his 
culture be not derived from books. This shepherd's 
outlook was a wide one (1. 2. 9") ; his apprehension 
of the meaning of events uncommonly clear ; his 
knowledge bom of reflection and the touch of the 
Divine Spirit. 

The boldness of his style was an expression of 
the boldness of the man and his thoughts. It 
required no smaU courage for a Judtean to enter 
Israelite territory for the express purpose of inter- 
fering in the religious and social life of the nation, 
denouncing everything as corrupt, threatening 
swift and utter ruin. Kor is that all. No speaker 
ever ran counter to the most cherished convictions 
of his auditors more daringly than the prophet who 
told them that the destinies'of other nations are as 
really guided by God as those of His chosen people; 
9^ is almost a contradiction of 3-. His courage was 
derived from his conviction of the reality and 
dignity of his mission. When the Lord God hath 
spoken, the man who hears Him cannot but prophesy. 
And whoever else may fail to hear, the prophet 
does not ; he is of the Pri\-y Council (3"- ®, cf. 
Gn 18^"). That is the starting-point of Hebrew 

LrrERATTEB.— Calvin, PrceUet. in Duod. Propk. Min. 1810 ; 
J. Gerhardi, Adn. Posth. in Propk. Amog et Jon. 1676; J. C. 
Harenbei^, Amot Proph. Expomt. 1768 ; L. J. TJUand, Annt*. 
ad toe. quced. Am. 1779 ; J. 8. Yat«, Amo» uber*. u. erOdrt, 
1810 ; Juynboll, Digptaatio de Amoto, 1828 ; Ew&ld, Die Proph. 
de* Atten Bunde*, 1840 ; Henderson, Minor PnpheU, 1845, 
1858 ; Baur, Der Proph. Amot, 1847 ; Gandell in Ths Speakei'i 
Comrnentary, 1876 ; Hitag-Steiner, IHe Zuioff Kl. Fivpk. 1881 ; 
TV. R. Smith, The Prcphet*o/I»ra^, 1896; Hoffmann, ' VewiH*e 
zn Amo«,' in ZATW, 1883 ; Gtmning, De Godtpraken ran Amot, 
ISSo : Davidson, Expositor, Mar. and Sept. 1S87 ; Keil, Die KL 
Proph. 1S8» ; Orelli, Di* Ztc6(f KL PnmA. 18S8 (tr. by BKoks) ; 
Bachmann, Prcepartftionen zu den KL Pr. Heft 3, 1890; 
Farrar, The Minor Prophet* ; -WTellhausen, Die Kl. Proph. 
18S2; Beuss, Die Propketen, Bd. ii. of A.T. 1892; MkA^t, 
Amot ocertat. 1893 ; BiUieb, Die vrichtigsten Satze «fer «. «. fe 
KrUii von Standp. der p. Am. u. H. out betraehM, iSSS; 
Guthe in Kautzsch's A.T. 1894; Comill, Der Itr. Prophet. 
1S95 : G. A. Smith, The Bk.oftheTwa»ftorhet*,lS96;DnTer. 




Joel and Amo*, 1897 ; last but not least, vrell deserving to be 
translated into Eng., Valeton, Amos en Ho$ea. 1894. 

J. Taylor. 

AMOZ {fo^), father of the prophet Isaiah (2 K 
19^, Is V, etc!), to be carefully distinguished froxn 
Amos (oioj;) the prophet. See Amos (p. ^5^ n.) 

AHPHIPOLIS ('A/i^/iroXtj). — Amphinolis, men- 
tioned in Ac 17' as a stage in St. Paul's mission- 
J'ourney from Philippi to Thossalonica, was a city of 
tiacedonia. It was situated on the eastern bank 
of the river Strymon, about 3 miles from the 
sea, closer to wnich lay its seaport Eion. The 
river, on leaving Lake Cercinitis, winds in a semi- 
circle round the base of a terraced hill, on which 
the town was built, protected by the river on three 
sides, and by a wall along the landward chord of 
the arc. It was, as Thucydides (iv. 102) says, 
conspicuous (xtpi^ai'i)!) toward sea and land ; and 
this is probably the import of its name, ' the all- 
around (visible) city ' (Classen, in loc, who suggests 
the parallel of ifmbstadt in Upper Hesse). Its 
importance, already marked by its earlier name 
'Nino Ways' ('EvWa bSol), made its possession keenly 
contested, alike on military and mercantile grounds. 
The Atlienians founded a colony under Hagnon in 
B.C. 437, which presented a history of chequered 
fortunes and varied interest, in its surrender to 
Brasidaa, tlie fi^ht under its walls between Brasidas 
and Cleon in which both fell, its refusal to submit 
again to the mother-city, its repeated attempts to 
assert its independence, till it passed into the pos- 
ses.sion of the Macedonians under Perdiccas and 
Philip, and eventually into that of the Romans. 
By these A. was constituted a free city, and made 
the cai)ital of the first of the four districts into 
which, in D.c. 167, they divided the province (Liv. 
xlv. 18. 29). The Via E^iatia passed through it. 
It was called in the Middle Ages Popolia (Tafel, 
Thessal. p. 498 f.), and is now represented by a 
village called Neochori, in Turkish Jenikoei (see 
plan in Leake, N.G. ii. 191). Zoilus, the carping 
critic of Homer, was a native, and AVTote a history 
of it in three books (Suidas, s.v.). 

William P. Dickson. 

AMPLIATUS ('A/ifl-XiaTos, RV correctly with 
« A B F G, Vulg. Boh. Orig., for TR 'AnvXias, 
D E L P, AV Amplias, the abbrev. form). — A Chris- 
tian greeted by St. Paul (Ro 16^) as the ' beloved 
in the Lord.' It is a very common Roman slave 
name. (Lightfoot, Philippians, p. 172; CIL vi. 
4899, 5154, etc.) 

Some further interest attaches to the name. It 
occurs in one of the earliest chambers of the Cata- 
comb of St. Domitilla, inscribed in large, bold 
letters over a cell belonging to the end of the 1st 
or beginning of the 2nd cent. A later inscription 
in the same chamber also contains the same name. 
The simplicity of the earliest inscription suggests 
a slave, and the prominence assigned to the name 
suggests that it belonged to some prominent 
member of the early Roman Church, perhaps a 
member of the household of Domitilla. 

LiTERATiJRK.— De Rossi, Bull. Arch. Chrit. Ser. III. vol. vi. 
C1881) pp. 67-74 ; AthenoBum, March 4, 1884, p. 289 ; Sariday and 
HeMllam, Romam, p. 424. A. C. HeADLAM. 

AMRAM. — (D-j^y • the people is exalted '). 

1. A Levite, son of Kohath and grandson of Levi 
(Nu 3"-", 1 Ch 6"- 8- 1«). He married Jochebed his 
father's sister, by whom he begat Aaron and 
Moses (Ex 6'«-») and Miriam (Nu 26*», 1 Ch 6^). 

2. A son of Bani who had contracted a marriage 
with a 'strange woman' in the time of Ezra 
(Ezr hv^). 

Amramites, The ('9191'C')- — A branch of the 
Kohathite family of the tribe of Levi. The name 
occurs in the account of the census taken by Moses 

(Nu 3*^), and again in tlie Chronicler's account 
of the organisation of the Levites in the time of 
David (1 Ch 26^^). W. C. Alleu. 

AMRAPHEL (Vij-ipw), mentioned as 'king of 
Shinar ' (Gn 14'). fcschrader, who suggested that 
the name was a corruption for ' Amraphi ' ('9T9k), 
was the first to identify this king with Khammurabi, 
the 6th king in the 1st Dynasty of Babylon. The 
cuneiform inscriptions inform us that Khammurabi 
was king of Babylon and N. Babylonia ; tliat he re- 
belled against the supremacy of Elam ; that he over- 
threw his rival Eri-aku, kingof Larsa; and, after con- 
quering Sumer and Accad, was tlie first to make a 
united kingdom of Babylonia. He reigned 55 years. 
Winckler gives the date of his reign as 2264-2210 : 
Sayce [Pair. Pal. p. 12) gives 2320 as the date of 
his uniting Babylonia. But the chron. is uncer- 
tain. The name is given by Hommel as Chammu- 
rapaltu (Gesch. d. Morrfenlandes, p. 68), and it has 
sometimes been transcribed as Chammu-ragas. 
Mr. Pinches considers Amraphel to be a Sem. 
name=Amar-apla = Amar-pal ('I see a son'), or 
Amra-apla = Amrapal (' see a son '). 

It is clear that the identification is not free from 
difficulty, so far as the Biblical account is con- 
cerned. (1) The date of Khammurabi, according 
to the reckoning of Winckler and Sayce, etc., is 
400 years earlier than the cent, to wliich Gn 14 is 
generally ascribed. (2) A. is described as ' king of 
Shinar ' ; and Shinar has generally been identified 
with Shumer, the S. part of Babylonia. Kham- 
murabi, while subject to the suzerainty of Elara, 
was king of Babylon and N. Babylonia, but not of 
Shumer or S. Babylonia. Thisdiffioultv has l>een met 
by the assumption that Shinar is to t)e understood 
to denote in Gn all Chaldoea, of which Babylon was 
the capital. No great exactitude in geog. terms 
can be expected. Shinar (Sangar), in the inscrip- 
tions, seems to be situated in Mesopotamia. Possibly 
Heb. tradition confused the Shinar of Mesopotamia 
with the Shumer of S. Babylonia. 

It seems best at present to suspend judgment 
upon this much disputed identification. The results 
or Assyriological research in illustration of Gn 14 
are still much disputed. 

Jos. (Ant. I. ix.) transcribes the name as 'Aftapa- 
^LdTjs, altliough the LXX has 'A^mp^dX, 

H. E. Rvle. 

AMULETS (D'pii^ Is 3«>, AV ear-rings). — 1. 
Oi-igin. The connexion with lahash, to mutter as 
a snake-charmer (Ps 59,^), points to something that 
has had whispered or chanted over it words of 
power and protection. Cf. Heb. hartom, magician, 
and its connexion with hcrct, the graving-pen of the 
learned -wTiter, and the Arab. ' talisman ' similarly 
associated with the (ailasan or long robe of the 
sacred dervish. The same idea of power through 
secret lore and sanctitj' is exemplified at the 
present day in Jerus., where crucifixes, pictures of 
the Virgin, and rosaries are laid on the pavement 
at the door of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre so 
as to give them this holy value in the market. 

2. Meaning. The central meaning of the a. is 
something that faith may clasp as a propliylactic 
against known and unknown dangers. It as.sumes 
a connexion between holiness and healing, between 
piety and prosperity, the first being appreciated 
for the sake of the second. It is a testimony to 
the sense of sin, for it is only that wliich is want- 
ing in holiness that requires to be covered or pro- 
tected. Hence the Arab, proverb says, ' The eye 
of the sun needs no veil.' Its li^ht is pure, and 
therefore no protection is required. 

The a. unites the protector and the protected ; 
what lays a duty on divine power lays on human 
weakness a corresiionding devotion. Fulness of 
consecration makes fulness of claim. Hence to 




the OriiiUiil iiiiinl fuiiiiliar ^vitll I'.et 

faitli. llie Monls ^.ot'Ill vciy iiatura!, mu' 

ill i!ie Lord, and in the i)o\ver of tii< miglit.' 
I'tiieot love ca-steth out fear.' 'I can do all 
Tilings in Him that strengtheneth nie.' Tims 
the a. has a true word of jwwer, for it teaches, 
' When I am devoted, I am endued." By a similar 
veliii le the apostle reaches the experience which 
tviy-. • When I am weak, then am I strong.' 

;<. I'l'issification. This corresponds Anth the 
daiiL-'i-rs and the points of contact. There is an a. 
Jor fh ' " ■" ist. 1) worn almost universally in 
the En ~ locket suspended over the breast, 

and Co;. . .: .-^.netimes of a small metal case of 

With this may be classed the neck-amulet. See 
< KKS( ENT. Similarly, there were a» for the nose 
and mouth for the dangers by inhalation ; for the 
oar and the temptations of hearing ; for the eye 
and what meets its vision (illost. 3, 7, 8). And 
so the veil for the head and face, and the sheet 
enveloping the M'hole figure of the Oriental woman, 
now tlie formalities of modesty, were doubtless 
once full of superstitions meaning. See Veil. 
Amulet articles among the Jews are chiefly the 
fringes of large and small tallith : the mezuza ; the 
pai)er with Ps 121 and certain Abracadabra for- 
mula*. Avhich the Rabbi puts in the room where 
there is an infant less than ei-rht davs old : and the 

^ "" Ill I II ■ ■ I II ——. I t I 


1. The ' Shield of Darid,' or ' Soltmion's Seal,' a favourite a. amoDg the Jews. 2. Extract from Jewish Birth-A., which 
gives, tinder Ps 121, the names of the Patriarchs and their wives, with a formula at each side forbidding the approacdi of 
Lilith or any witch. 3. Breast-a. {taubeh). 4. Eye-a., seen in the brass thimble-like ornament on the nose of the Egji>tian 
woman. 5, 6. Cactus, and Uack or red hand-a^. 7, 8. A* for ooee and ears, worn by Bedawin w<Mnen, along with necklace, 

bracelets, and armlet- 

gold or silver, but more freq. of a lieart-shaiKxl 
sheath of cloth ornamented with a desij.'n in gold 
thread. This may contain for the Moslem a few 
words from the Koran, called a hejab, covering, 
protection ; and if for a Christian, a picture of the 
Virgin and Child, called a taubeh, 'penitence.' 

phylacteries of the brow and arm. See Phtl- 
ACTER V. Amulets are also used for the protection, 
not only of animals such as camels and horses, but 
even for newly-built houses, snch protection usually 
taking the form of a rouglily-dra\vn human hand 
in black or red, or of a cactus plant or aloe hung 




by the roots from the arch of the doorway and 
kept alive by the moisture of the air (iUust. 5 and 
6). O. M. Mackie. 

priest ill 
ALOti V. 

1. A Merarito, 1 Ch 6^". 2. A 
1.1 temple, Noh 11'=*. See Gene- 

AN. — 1. An, called the indef. article, is the old 
Eng. form of the num. adj. one. As early as 1150 
the n is found dropped before a consonant, and at 
the date of the AV the usage had become general 
to employ a before a consonantal sound (includin*' 
u and cii pronounced yn), and an before a vowel 
sound (including silent h). Some hesitation is 
found when the art. precedes a word beginning 
with u-h. Thus we hnd 'an whole' in Nu 10- 
(ed. of 1611), but 'a whole' in Nu ll-""; 'an 
whore' in Pr 23-'^ (ed, 1611), 2 Es 16^ (ed. 1611), 
but'aM-hore' elsewhere. Again, the ed. of 1611 
gives 'such an one' in Job 14', Sir 6'-* 10* 20", 
2 Mac e-"^; but 'such a one' in Gn 41=«, Ru i\ 
Ps 50-» 68->, Sir 2()-^, 1 Co 5»- ", 2 Co 10" 122- «, 
Gal 6', Philem *. Later edd. give ' such an one ' 
in all these passages. 

More varied is the usage when the art. precedes 
h. In the ed. of 1611 (the later edd. have made 
many changes) we find 'a habitation,' Jer 33^-, 
but 'an hab.' in Ex 15^ Is 22'« 34" and other five 
places ; ' a hair ' in 1 K 1", Lk 21i«, but ' an hair ' 
in Dn 3-^ Mk 2V», Ac 2T'* ; 'a hairy,' Gn 27", but 
'an hairv,' Gn 252«, 2 K P; 'a hammer,' Jer 23-'9, 
but ' an hammer,' Jg 4^^ ; and so with many other 
words. The explanation of this inconsistency prob- 
ably is, not that the usage for a or an was not 
fixed, but that there was no fixed pronunciation 
of h. On the whole, an is found more frequently 
than n before words beginning with h. 

2. In ' an hungered ' ( ' a liungered ' is not found 
in AV 1611), which occurs Mt 4^ 12'- ^ 25«- ■•"• •*'-'• •", 
Mk 2-', Lk 6', the an is not the indef. art., but the 
prep, an or on. See A*. J. Hastings. 

ANAB (3jy. 'grapes').— A city of Judah in the 
Negeb hills (Jos ll-i 15««), inhabited first by the 
Anakim. Now the ruin 'Annb near Debir. It is 
noticed as still a village in the 4th cent. A.D. 
{Onomasticon, s.v. Anab). SWP vol. iii. sh. xxiv. 


ANAEL ('Ava-/i\, but Vwan Syr. and Heb., and 
Vxcn Aram.) was brother of Tobit and father of 
Achiacharus, To 1^^ 

AN AH (.!};•). —1. A daughter of Zibeon, and 
motlier of Oholibamah, one of Esau's wives, Gn 
362.1J. 18. 2S (R), The mention of a daughter in 
this genealogical list has been used to prove that 
kinship amongst the Horites was traced througii 
women (W. R. Smith in Jovnial of Philology, ix. 
p. 50). As is pointed out, however, in RVm, some 
ancient authorities (including LXX. Sam. Pesh.) 
read .vo» instead of daughter, which would identify 
this A. with 2. a son of Ziljeon, Gn 36^^ (R), 1 Cli 
l*^-*\ 3. A Horite 'duke,' brother of Zibeon, 
Gn 36-"- » (R), 1 Ch l**. If we take A. as an 
eponym rather than a personal name, and think of 
relationships between clans rather than individuals, 
it is quite possible to reduce the above three refer- 
ences to one. This can be done all the more 
reatlily by adopting with Kautzsch in Gn 36- the 
reading nhn 'the Horite' as in v.*" instead of MT 
inn 'the Hivite.' In regard to No. 2 the note is 
appended, 'This is A. who found the hot springs 
(AV the mules) in the wilderness, as he fed the asses 
of Zibeon his father' (Gn 36^^). For the Heb. cp-n 
which is a &ir. \ey., LXX offers the unintelligible 
Tbv'la/xtit', Sam. hasc'?'(<n 'the Emim' (an aboriginal 
race of giants mentioned in Gn 14', Dt 2"'*"), and 

is followed by Onk. and Pseud. -Jon. It was 
simply the context that gave rise to the conjecture 
accepted by Luther and AV that the word means 
nudes. The Vulg. trn. (aquas calidas) prob. is coiTect 
(so Kautzsch, 'die heiasen Quellen'), and 'the hot 
springs' may possibly be identified with Callirrhoe 
to the E. of the Dead Sea. The chief difficulty in 
accepting this interpretation is that no root for 
the word can be discovered which would suit such 
a meaning (Oxf. Heb. Lex. s.v. ; cf. Dillmann and 
Delitzsch on Genesis, I.e.). J. A. Selbie. 

ANAHARATH (n-jnjK), Jos 19", mentioned with 
&\\ion ('Ayun Sh'ain) and Rabbith (Mba) on the 
east side of the Plain of Esdraelon in Issachar. It 
is the modern en-Naurah of Jezreel iii t!ie Valley 
of Jezreel. SWP vol. ii. slieet ix. 

C. R. CoxuEn. 

ANAIAH (n;j;;^ 'J" hath answered'). — !. A 
Levite Neh 8^ called Ananias 1 Es 9^. 2. One 
of those who sealed the covenant Neh 10^. 

ANAK, ANAKIM (p:y, D'pjj?, 'Y.v6.K-it>.).—lt is often 
said that Anak is the name of the person from 
whom the Anakim were regarded as having their 
descent. But the name Anak occurs without the 
article only in the descriptive phrase ' sons of Anak ' 
Dt 9^, Nu 13^ ' And there we saw the Nephilim, 
the sons of Anak of the Nephilim.' If we have 
any account of a person called A., this is the 
account ; and he is said to be one of the ancient 
Nephilim or demigods. (See Nephilim). But 
probably here, as in all the other places (Jos 15"- " 
21", Jg 1-", Nu 13-'2-'-*), we have a descriptive 
phrase for a race of men, rather than the name of an 
ancestor. In these other places the article is used. 
We have ' the Anak,' or ' the Anok,' the word being 
used collectively, and denoting the race, just as 
does the plural Anakim. If a progenitor tor this 
race is mentioned, he is Arba (wliich see), and not 

The Anakim were of the giant race (Nu 13^-'', 
Dt I'js 210. a. VI. •.'0. 21 (ji. i)^ T,j jjj^^j ^jjgjj. ^g^^ notably 

at Hebron, but also farther N . , and near the Mediter. 
coast (Jos H^-'-i'' ir-'i-22). They seem to have been, 
however, rather a race of men than an independent 
people or group of peoples. Politically, they were 
Amorite or Perizzite or Philistine, as the case 
might be. The wars in which Joshua and Caleb 
conquered them were not separate from their wars 
against the Can. peoples. Presumably the Anakim 
were relatively unintellectual, were sulwrdinate to 
the Amorite, and were for that very reason the 
more formidable as fighters against a common 
enemy. For additional particulars .see Giaxt and 
Rephaim. W. J, Beecuer. 

ANAMIM. — The Anamim (c'a:y, "EvtumdiJ., klvt- 
/xeTui/x) are stated in the ethnographical list Gn 
10", 1 Ch P\ to have been descendants, or a tribe, 
of Mizraim, i.e. Egypt. They have not yet been 
identified. The attempts to discover this people 
in one or otlier of the races represented on the 
Egj'p. monuments have been based on some more 
or less striking similarity in the name. El>ers 
identifies them with the Aamu or Naamu (Ana- 
maima), i.e. cowherds, who are included among the 
tribes ruled by the Pharaohs 1 r)th or 14th cent. B.C. 
They occupy the second place in the procession 
(after the liutu or Lutu), and are ro]>resented as 
reddish men of Sem. type, as is shown by the head 
of the man who represents them in the grave of 
Seti I. They immigrated into Eg>'pt before the 
Hyksos from Asia. Their capital was on the 
Bucolic arm of the Nile, and, in addition to being 
cattle rearers, tlicv were imuorters of Asialir jn). 
ducts to Egyi'i i>ie Kiehm, BWB). 

J. Millau. 




ANAM MELECH (^;^;i).— A cod worshipjjed along 
witli Adrammelech with rites like those of Molech 
by the foreign settlers brought by the Assyrians to 
Samaria (2 K 17*^, of. v.**). The worshippers are 
said to have come from Sephar\-aim=Sabara'in, 
a Syrian city destroyed by Shalmaneser (Bab. 
Chronicle, col. i. line 2S, in Winckler, KeUinschr. 
Textbuch. Cf. Hal6vy, ZA, ii. 401, 402). Winckler 
[AT Untersuchungen, p. 97 S.), doubting that 
Syrians would be settled in Samaria, a district so 
near their own land, takes Sepharvaim as a false 
reading, or false editorial correction, introduced 
from 2 K 18**, for Sipar (Sippar), the well-known 
city of Northern Babylonia. 

The first part of the word Anammelech contains 
perhaps the name of the Bab. god of the sky, or of 
a third of the sky, Anu. The whole name is 
taken by Schrader (KAT\ 1883, p. 284) to mean 
•Ann is prince,' but the meaning is doubtful. 
Pos.'sibly the writer of Kings meant by the name to 
identify the Bab. Anu with the Ammonite Molech 
— Anu-Molech. W. E. Barnes. 

AN AN (li?, cf. Sabean j::i'). — 1. One of those who 
sealefl the covenant, Neh 10^. 2. 1 Es 5''=Hanan, 

Ezr 2^, Xeh 7^. 

ANANI r^X:==^::s_).—X son of Elioenai, 1 Ch 3=*. 

ANANIAH (t;^: 'J" hath covered'), Xeh 3^.— 
The father of Maaseiah, and grandfather of 
Azariah, who took part in rebuilding the walls of 
Jems. He was probably a priest. Cf. v.^. 

ANANIAH (niiiz Neh ll^s).— A town inhabited 
by Benjamites after the Captivity. According to 
Robinson, the present Beit Hanina, a collage 2 mUes 
N. of Jerusalem. The position near Nob and Ana- 
thoth, and east of Gibeon, renders this identification 
probable. See Elox ; and SWP vol. iii. sh. xiv. 


ANANIAS. — A ' disciple ' who lived in Damascus, 
and to whom the Lord appeared in a vision, bidding 
him go and baptize Saul of Tarsus. Saul had been 
prepared for his coming by a vision. A. hesitated 
at first, knowing Saul's reputation as a persecutor ; 
but, being encouraged by the Lord, went and laid 
his hands upon Saul, who received his sight, arose, 
and was baptized. Such is the account in Ac 9**''^. 
In St. Paul's speech to the multitude at Jems. 
(Ac 22^-'^*) we are told that A. was a man ' devout 
according to the law ' and one ' to whom witness 
was borne by all the Jews that dwelt ' at Damas- 
cus ; and some further words of his to St. Paul are 
given in which he speaks of Christ as ' the Just 
One.' He is not mentioned in St. Paul's speech to 

The tnwlitions about him are not of a primitive kind. In 
Pseudo-Dorotheus' list of the ~i disciples (and also in the Hippo- 
Ivtean list) he occurs fifth in order, after Thaddaeus and before 
Stephen, and is represented as Bishop of Damascus In the 
Bk of the Bee by Solomon of Basra (1222), (c xlix. ed. Wallis 
Budge), A. is numbered among the seventy. He was the disciple 
of the Baptist, and taught in Damascus and Arfo£L He was 
slain bv Pol, the general of the army of Aretas, and was laid in 
the church which he buUt at Arb61. The Gr. Meneea (Oct 1) 
say that he did many cures in Damascus and Eleutheropolis 
(Ijtin.' bishop of the 'former placeX and was tormented with 
s>j'.;i.ring and btiming by Lucian the Prefect (Rom. Mart. 
Licinius), and was finaUy cast out of the city and stoned. The 
Basilian Jlenology adds that he was ordained by Peter and 
Andrew, and gives a picture of him being stoned by two men. 
The Abyssinian Calendar commemorates him on the 6th of 
Tekemt.' In the Rom. Mart>Tology he occurs on Jan. 25 ; in the 
Armenian on Oct. 15. 

The full Gr. acts of his martvrdom have never been printed, 
but the Bollandists, under Jan. 25, give a Lat. VS of them, in 
which the scene of his preaching is said to have been Betha- 
gaure or Betagabra, near Eleutheropolis. He is likely to have been 
among the personal disciples of the Lord, and hasa better claim to 
stand in the list of the seventy disciples than most of those who 
appear in the -voA of Pseodo- Dorotheas. 

M. E. James. 

ANANIAS {'AFariai=Heb. .T«q 'J' hath been 
gracious'). — 1. A son of Emmer (1 Es 9^^) = Hanaiii 
of Ezr \(P\ 2. A son of Bebai (1 Es 9^) = Hananiah 
of Ezr 10'^. 3. One of those who stood at Ezra's 
right hand at the reading of the law (1 E8 9**)= 
Anaiah of Neh 8^. 4. A Levite (1 Es 9<B) = Hanan 
of Neh 8^. 5. The name which the angel Raphael 
gave as that of his father, when he introduced 
himself to Tobit under the assumed name of 
Azarias (To 5'^"). 6. An ancestor of Judith 
(Jth 8'). 7. The husband of Sapphira. He fell 
do\vn dead at the rebuke of St. Peter, and the 
same fate, three hours afterwards, befell his wife 
(Ac 5^*-)- The intention of this narrative is some- 
times misunderstood as regards both the offence of 
these persons and the cause of their death. It is 
quite a mistake to suppose that a rigid system of 
communism was enforced in the Jerusalem Church, 
and that A. and Sapphira by ' keeping back part 
of the price' violated a rule they had pledged 
themselves to obey. St. Peter's words suffice to 
refute this notion : * Whiles it remained, did it not 
remain thine own ? and after it was sold, was it not 
in thy powsr ? ' But it was inexcusable hypocrisy 
to retain part of the price and pretend to surrender 
the whole. 'They wished to serve two masters, 
but to appear to serve only one' (Meyer). As to 
the fact of their sudden death, even Baur and 
Weizsacker admit that a genuine tradition under- 
lies the narrative. As to its cause, whatever this 
may have been from a secondary point of view, 
there can be no doubt that in Acts it is traced 
to thi deliberate will and intention of St. Peter. 
(Note esp. v.* and cf. the parallel case of St. Paul 
and Elymas in Ac 13".) 

LiTERATTBK. — Baur, Pauhi*, L 28ff. ; Keander, Planting of 
Chriitianitif, Bohn's tr. L ^ff. ; Weizsacker, ApogL Age, L 24, 
56 f . ; Comm. of All ord, Meyer, etc 

8. See preceding article. 9. The high priest 
before whom St. Paul was brought by Claudius 
Lysias (Ac 23'*-), and wliose outrageous conduct 
upon this occasion provoked the apostle to appljr 
to him the contemptuous epithet of ' whited wall.' 
The same A. shortly afterwards appeared at 
Ciesarea amongst St. f aul's accusers before Felix 
(Ac24^''-)- He was the son of Nedelweus, and held 
the high priesthood from c. 47-59 .A..D. He owed 
his appointment to the office to Herod of Chalcis. 
During his administration there were bitter 
quarrels between the Jews and the Samaritans, 
and these seemed on one occasion likely to lead to 
his deposition. On account of a massacre of some 
Galilseans by the Samaritans, the latter had been 
attacked anti many of their villages plimdered by 
the Jews. A. was accused of complicity in these 
acts of violence, and was sent by Quadratus, the 
governor of Syria, to stand his trial at Rome. 
Powerful influence was at work at the imperial 
court on the side both of the Samaritans and the 
Jews ; but, thanks to the efforts of the younger 
Agrippa, Claudius gave his decision in favour of 
the high priest, and A. returned to discharge the 
functions of an office which he disgraced by his 
rapacity and violence. It was no uncommon thing 
for him to send his servants to the threshing-floors 
to take the tithes by force, while he defrauded the 
inferior priests of their dues, and left some of them 
to die of starvation. His own end was a miserable 
one. His sympathies had always been with the 
Romans, and he had thus incurred the hatred of the 
nationalist party. When the great rebellion broke 
out which endei in the siege and destruction of 
Jems., A. concealed himself, but was discovered, 
and murdered by the fanatical populace. 

LiTKRATCBK.— Jos. Ant. IT. V. 2, VI. ii. 3, DC JL 3 ; Wan n. 
xviL 9 : Schsirer, HJP L iL 173, ISSf., 211, n. i. 1S2. 200ff. 

J, A. Selbie. 




ANANIEL {'A»ayii/i\), one of the ancestors of 
Tobit, To 1». A Gr. fonn of ^»}^,. 

ANATH (n;y,), the father of Sharagar, Jg S^J 5«. 
'Anftt is tlie name of a goddess worshipped in Pal. , 
of. Jg 1»=, Jos 15 », Is 10*' ; it is found on Egyptian 
monuments from the 18th dynasty. 

G. A. Cooke. 

ANATHEMA. See Accursed. 

ANATHOTH {rf\rt;-j).—i. A town in Benjamin 
assigned to the Levites (Jos 21'8, 1 Ch 6*^), named 
from (possibly plural of) 'Anftth or 'Anat, a 
Chaldoian deity worshipped among the Canaanites 
(Sayce, Hibbert Lect. pp. 187-189 ; Vogu6, 3fel. 41 ff. ), 
now called 'Andta. It is situated 2^ miles north-east 
of Jerusalem over the shoulder of Scopas. There 
are still twelve or fifteen houses on the spot, and the 
remains of what was apparently a handsome church. 
From its commanding position it has a fine view 
northward and also eastward over the broken hills 
of the wilderness, stretching down towards the 
north end of the Salt Sea. It was the home of 
Abiathar, 1X2**; of Abiezer, one of David's thirty 
captains, 2 S 23" ; of Jehu, one of his mighty men, 
1 Ch 12^, and of Jeremiah the prophet, Jer P. 
It was reoccupied after the Exile (Ezr 2^', Neh 
T^, 1 Es 5'*). A quarry at "Anftta still supplies 
building stone to Jerusalem. The vision of the 
dreary wilderness to the east, and the scorching 
of its dry winds which Jeremiah was familiar with 
in his native town, have imprinted themselves on 
liis projihecies. To one standing upon Scopas, 
Anathoth is lying at his feet, Is 10^. 

2. A personal name — (a) the son of Becher a 
Benjamite, 1 Ch 7*. Possibly this and Alemeth 
followin'' are names of towns in which sons of 
Becher dwelt, (b) Neh 10^", possibly stands for 
' jnen of Anathoth ' (7-"^). 

Anathothite ('nhjyrt) is the uniform designation 
in KV of an inhabitant of Anathoth. AV offers 
such variants as Anetothite, Anethothite, Anto- 
thite. A, Hekdekson. 

ANCHOR.-See Ship. 

ANCIENT has now a narrow range of usage. In 
AV it is freely applied to men, as Ezk 9^ * then 
they began at the a. men ' ; Ezr 3"* * many of the 
priests and Levites ... a. (RV 'old') men.' Cf. 
Luttrell (1704), 'Sir Samuel Astry (being very 
antient) has resigned his place of clerk ; and 
Penn, Life (1718), 'This A.M.C. aforeseid, is an 
Ancient Maid.' Following the Heb. (and LXX) 
a. is used as a subst., as Is 3* ' the judge and the 
prophet and the prudent and the a.' ; but esp. 
in the plur., as Ps 119'"*' ' I vmderstand more than 
the a» ' (RV ' aged '). In these places ' the ancients ' 
are mostly a definite class, the Elders of Israel, or 
of some tribe or city. See Eldeu in OT. 

Wright (Word Book" p. 36) points out that 
' the ancient ' is used for the plur. in the Pref. of 
1611; it is probable that in Job 12''" we have an 
instance of the same: 'With the ancient (RV 
•with aged men') is wisdom'; while Sir 39* is 
unmistakable, 'seek out the wisdom of all the 
ancient ' {vdyrwv 6.pxa.iwv, RV ' ancients'). 

J. Hastings. 

ANCIENT OP DAYS (i'i?"i' pm).—A common 
Syriac expression, used three times of the Divine 
Being in Daniel (7"- "• ■*), at first without the article 
(wrongly inserted by AV in v.'), and meaning 
simply 'old,' 'aged,' (see RV). The expression 
has no reference to the eternity of God, and does 
not bear upon the question of the date of the book, 
as if it carried a contrast to the New Divinities 
introduced by Antiochus Epiphanes. It is a repre- 
sentation natural to the fearless anthropomorphism 

of the Bible, which never hesitates to attribute to 
the Deity the form and features of man. The 
object is to convey the impression of a venerable 
and majestic aspect. 

P'PV, ancient, is properly an Aram, word : in 
Heb. it occurs once only, in the late passage 1 
Ch 42a. A. S. AOLEN." 

ANCLE (Ezk 47') and anole-boneg (Ac S').— 
This is the spelling of AV after Coverdale and 
Tindale. Camb. Bible and RV spell ankle. In 
old Eng. the spelling Ls indifferent. Shaks. has 
even anckle. Besides the above, RV gives ' ankle 
chains' in Nu 31*' (AV 'chains'), and in Is 3*(AV 
' ornaments of the legs'). J. Hastings. 

AND is used in AV both as a copulative and as a 
conditional conjunction. 1. As a copul. conj., the 
Oxf. Diet, points out the use of and to express the 
consequence, as Gn P ' God said, Let there be light ; 
and tliere was light ' ; Lk 7" 'I say unto one. Go, 
and he gocth' ; Sit 8* 'Speak the word onlv, and 
my servant shall be healed ' ; Lk 10^ ' This do, and 
thou shalt live.' Cf. Scottish Paraphrases 35-' — 
' My broken body thus I pive 
For you, for all ; take, eat, and live. 

Thus and is often more than a mere copula. It 
even has an adversative force in ' he answered and 
said, I go, sir: and went not' (Mt 21^). 2. In 
middle Eng. and was used conditionally ( = t/"), a 
usage whicli Skeat and others believe to have, been 
borrowed from Iceland. Cf. Bacon, Essays, ' It is 
the nature of extreme self-lovers, as they will set 
an house on fire, and it were but to roast their 
egges.' Of this use of arwi? Wright points to Gn 
44*", Nu 5^ as examples. When and meant if, it 
was often spelt an, and was often strengthened by 
adding if. Hence we find and, an, an if, and if, 
all = if. In A V we have Mt 24« ( Lk 12«) ' But and 
if (RV 'But if) that evil servant shall say in his 
heart ' ; Lk 20^ ' But and if (RV ' But if ') we say ' ; 
1 Co 7^ 'But and if (RV 'But if) thou marry" ; 
1 P 3" 'But and if (so RV) ye suffer.' Except 
1 P 3" (dW el Kal), the Gr. is always iav Si. 

J. Hastings. 

ANDREW.— The first-called apostle, brother of 
Simon Peter : their father's name was Jonas or 
John, and their native city was Bethsaida of 
Galilee. Their mother's name is traditionally 

Name. — The name Andreas ('AvSp^as) isGreek. It 
is usually believed to occur first in Herodotus 
(vi. 126), where it is the name of the great-grand- 
father of Cleisthenes of Sicyon. It occurs also in 
Dio Cassius (Ixviii. 32), in the form 'AvSpela^, as the 
name of a rebel Jew in Crete in Trajan's reign. 
There are other instances of the name, but it is 
not very common. 

References to him in NT, — In the Synoptists 
the call of Peter and A. while they were fishing is 
narrated by Mt 4^^-^ and Mk 1"< It took place 
at the Sea of Galilee. The narrative in no way 
implies that this was their first meetin<^ witli the 
Lord. The name of A. next occurs in Mk 1^, 
where Jesus enters the house of Simon and A. and 
heals the mother-in-law of Peter. Next in the list 
of the Twelve, where Mt and Lk place him after 
Peter and before James and John, while Mk's 
order is Peter, James and John, Andrew. In 
Mk 13* he is coupled with Peter, James, and John 
in the ouestion put to our Lord about the time of 
the End. His name does not elsewhere occur in the 
Synoptists. In St. John's Gospel he is much more 
prominent. In ch.l A. is a discijjle of John the 
Baptist. He hears the words, ' Behold the Lamb 
of God,' follows Christ, and spends a day with 
Him. He then brings his brother Peter t-o Christ, 
and may probably have had to do also with the 




call of Philip, who was of the same city. In ch. 6 
it is A. who volunteers information about the lad 
with the loaves and tishes, on the occasion of the 
feeding of the five thousand. In ch. 12 the Greeks 
who desire to see Jesus apply to PhUip ; Philip 
teUs A. ; and the two tell Jesus. In Ac 1 A. occurs 
for the last time, in the list of the apostles, follow- 
ing James and John, and preceding Philip (as 
in St. Mark). 

SlBSEQLEXT Traditioxs. — In the 2nd cent. A- 
was the hero of one of the romances attributed to 
Leucius, a Docetic writer. We have a fairly 
comprehensive abridOTient of this book in the 
Miracula Andreae of Gregory of Tours, besides 
some episodes and fragments of the original Gr., 
in part yet unedited. The fullest discussion of the 
literature is in Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostel- 
geschirhten ^i. 543-622) : see also Bonnet's ed. of 
some late Gr. Encomia, based on the Leucian Acts, 
in AtwUecta Bollandiana (xiii., and separately). 

Briefly smnmarised, the literature consists of : — 

(1) Acta Andreae etMatthaei (fit Matthiae), ed. by Tiscfaendorf, 
Act, Apott. Apoer. ll&tthew or Matthias is a captive in the land 
of the Anthropc^ihi^ Christ sends A. to rescue him : and then 
asBumes the guise of a seaman and takes A. and his disciples (who 
seem to be Alexander and Rufus) to the countiy in qoe^km. 
Matthew is rescued, and A. is tormented by the sav^e natnres 
for several da^-s. He then causes a flood to overwhelm the city ; 
the result is a general converaon. The most interesting psrt 
of the story is perhaps the account of a miracle done by our 
Lord, which A. narrates dtiring the voyage. We have this 
legend in Ethiopic, Syriac, and Anglo-Saxon : the last-named is a 
poetical version by Cynewulf, the Northumbrian poet, preserved 
m the famous VerceUi Codex. 

(2) Acta Petri et Andreae, ed. Hsc^endorf in ApoetUj/ptea 
Apoerjiphae. Imperfect in Gr. ; extant (as Acts of St. Jude) in 
Ettiiopic, and complete in Old Slavonic. It contains a reaUsA- 
tion of our Lord's saying about the camel passing through a 
needle's eye. It is exceedingly doubtful whether this belonged 
to the original Leucian noveL 

(3) Miracula Andreae, by Gregory of Tours, ed. Bonnet, in tite 
2nd vol. of Gregory's works in the Monumenta Germaniae 
Eittoriea. Tius must be coupled with the Gr. Encomia, which 
cover much the same {proond. 

The scene of A.'s preaching is laid in the land of the Anthro- 
pofdiagi (MyrmidoniaX then in Amasea, Sinope, Kicaea, Nico- 
media, Byzantium, Thrace, Macedonia, and Patna in Achaia, 
where the martj-rdom takes place. 

The traditions of the martyrdom at Patns are faurly can- 
stant. A. is crucified by the pro<on$ttl Aegeas <»' Aegeates, 
because by his preachii^ he has induced the pro-consul's wife 
Maximilla to leave her husband. Until recently the best 
authority for the martyrdom was taken to be a certain Epistte 
of the priests and deacons ot Achaia, first published by Woog 
in 1749, and then by Tisdiendorf. However, M. Max Bonnet 
has proved in an article in the Bjfzantinitehe ZeH*ehr\ft (L894) 
that this is a tr. from Lat. into Gr. The nearest ni^woach 
which we as yet possess to the Gr. original n in the Mtraeula 
and Encomia, coupled with some quotations made by Augus- 
tine and others. 

So much for our knowledge of the Leucian Acts. 

We possess Acts of A. in Coptic (fragmentary) and Ethiopic, 
some of which couple this apostle with Barth^mnew and with 
Paul. The Acts of A. and Bartholomew seem to be modelled 
on those of A. and Matthew. Those of A. and Patil, which 
are incomplete, and exist only in Coptic, give an account of 
I^Mil's descent into Hades by way of the sea, of lus return, 
and of how a Scarabaeus (ii'xtuft) was employed by the two 
apostles to obtain entrance for them into a city which the 
Jews had shut against them. The Egj-p. Acts of A, assign 
crjcifixion and stoning as the manner of his death. 

Other traditions may be mentioned. Origen (ap. Evt. HE 
iii. 1) makes A. pr^M^i among the Scythians, that is, on the 
Black Sea ; cf. the Leudan Acts. At Sinope an image of A., 
said to have been made in his lifetime, was "king preserved ; 
and also the seat where he taught, which wajs of white marble. 
He was r^arded as the apostle of Byzantium, where he or- 
dained Stachj"s as first bishop. 

Lipsius believes that the legend of the preaching in Achaia 
arose from a confusion between the Tauric branch of the 
Ackxans on the £. shore of the Black Sea, and the Achaeans 
in the X. of the Peloponnese. 

A. appears as the author of a gospel condemned in the so- 
called Gelasian Decree. Xo trace of it is to be found elsewhere. 
There are references to him in the Clementine Becogniti<His 
(L 56, where he answers the Sadducees ; ii. 62 sqq.}. He appears 
as legislator in the 'O/w luti juuijK, and in the Apostolic Con- 
stitutioiis. He also figures in the Acts of Polyxena and 
Xanthippe. His relics were rediscovered in Justinian's time 
at Constantinople ; and remained there until 1210, when (Cardinal 
Peter of Capua brought them to Amalfi. They are said to 
have been brought from Patrae to Constantinople in 357 or 
358 by Artemius. His cros, or part of it, is in St. Peter's at 
Rome, enclosed in one of the four great piers of the dome. 

The apprc^kriation of the decussate or saltire cross to St. 
Andrew is of very late date. In the 13tb cent. (e.g. in a 
statne at Amiens) he commonly botda the npright cross. 

Docmnents relating to the translation of tlM arm of St. 
Andrew into Scotland by St. Regains (who is variously placed, 
in the 4th, 5th, and 9th cent.) may be seen in the Bollandists 
under Oct. 17. 

His festival in the Lat. and Gr. Churches is on Xov. SO; 
it occurs in the Lat. Martifrivm, and in the Kalendar of 

LmRATCKK. — Lipsius, Bonnet, Tischendorf, ; Malan, 
ConjUeU of ih» Holy ApotUet; von Lemm, Eopt. Apotr. 

M. R. James. 

ANDRONICaS ('ArSp6wtK<K).—A Christian greeted 
by St. Paul in Ro 16^ together with Junias. 
They are described as being (1) 'kinsmen of St. 
Paul,' probably implying ' fellow-countrymen.' 
The word is used in this sense in Ro fl^. It 
would be unlikely that so many as are mentioned 
in this chapter (w.^- "• '^) should be kinsmen in a 
more litenQ sense. (2) They are called by St. 
Paul his ' f eUow-prisoners. ' They may have shared 
with the apostle some unrecorded imprisonment 
(cf. 2 Co II-^, Clem. Rom. ad Cor. v.), or, like him, 
been imprisoned for Christ's sake. It is unlikely 
that the term is used in a metaphorical sense. 
(3) They were ' distinguished among the apostles,' 
a phrase which probably means that they were 
distinguished members of the apostolic body, the 
word Apostle (which see) being used in its wider 
sense. (4) They were Christians before St. Paul, 
so that they belonged to the earliest days of the 
Christian community. The name is Greek, and 
like most others in this chapter was borne by 
members of the imperial household (CIL vi 
5325, 5326, 11,626). It would have been common 
in the East. (See the Commentaries, ad loc. 
For later traditions, which add nothing historical, 
see Acta Sanctorum, May, iv. 4. ) 

A. C. Headlam. 

AKEM (cj?), 1 Ch 6~^ only.— A town of Issachar, 
noticed with Ramoth. It appears to answer to 
Engannim (which see) in the parallel list (Jos 21®), 
but might perhaps represent the village of 'Antn 
on the hiUs west of the plain of Esdraelon. This 
place, which is well watered — whence perhaps its 
name, ' two springs ' — is the Anea of the fourth 
century A.D. (Onomasticon, s. v. Aniel and Bethana), 
which had good baths, lying 15 Roman miles from 
Caesarea. Eusebius, however, identifies this site 
with Aner. SWP vol. ii. sheet viii. 


AMER {'4a, LXX Aivdy, Sam. cxr).— One of the 
three Amorite chieftains, the other two being 
Manure and Eshcol, who were bound, in virtue of 
their ' covenant ' with Abraham, to render him 
assistance, when he was sojourning at Hebron (Gn 
1413. Uj_ As Mamre is an old name for Hebron (Gn 
23'-) and Eshcol is the name of a valley not far from 
Hebron (Xu 13"-^), it is natural to suppose that 
Aner also was the name of a locality which gave its 
name to a clan. DUlmann (in loc.) compares Ne'ir, 
which is the name of a range of hiUs in the 
vicinity. H. E. Rylk. 

ANER (-4?), 1 Ch 6™ only.— A towTi of Manasseh, 
west of Jordan (not noticed in the parallel passage 
Jos 21^). The site is doubtful. Possibly EUdr, 
north-west of Shechem, S WP vol. u. sh. xL 


ANGEL ('5Kki mardk, Sept. dyYeXoj and other- 
wise). — L The word is frequently used of men in 
the sense of 'messenger,' especially in the plur. 
Gn 32*, Nu 21^, Dt 2-'*, Jos 6". In the sense of 
'angel' the term is chiefly used in the sing, in 
earlier writings, but plur. Gn 19^- ^ (J), and ' angels 
of God,' Gn 28^ 32^ (E), In later books, particu- 
larly the poetical, the plur. occurs oftener. Job 4^*, 
Ps 78* 91" 103* 104* 14S^ and in such books as 




Zee and Dn plurality is implied. So in Job 1" 
2' ; in Gn 32- they are a ' camp ' or host, and in 
Dt 33- ' myriads ' ; cf. I's 68'". In the writing F 
(Priests' Code) no mention is made of angels. 
Like the existence of God, the existence of angels 
is presui)i)Osed in UT, not asserted. They are not 
said to have been created, rather they are alluded 
to as existing prior to the creation of the earth, 
Job 38' (Gn l"^'!, cf. 3'" IP). When they appear, it 
is in human form: they are called 'men,' Gn 
182. 18. «3 32U4, Jos 5'», Ezk ff^- "• ", Dn S'" 10'«- " ; 
the 'man Gabriel,' Dn 9^' (cf. Lk 24^ Ac l'"), and 
apart from the seraphim (Is 6-) are nowhere in OT 
represented as winged (Rev 8" 14*), though Philo 
so describes them (irrepotpvoCffi). In NT they are 
called 'spirits' (Ho 1'*), but not so in OT, where 
even God is not yet called spirit (Jn 4^^). To 
Mohammed the angel Gabriel was the ' holy spirit.' 
When they appear they speak, walk, touch men 
(1 K 19»), take hold of them by the hand (Gn 19'"), 
and also eat with them (Gn 18*, though, on the 
other hand, cf. Jg 6'*' 13'«). The statement Ps 78^ 
that 'men did eat the food of angels' (lit. the 
mighty, Ps 103'^, Jl 3"), a statement repeated in 
"NVis le-"", 2 Es P*, can hardly be more than poetical 
colouring of the fact that the manna caine down 
from heaven, as the parallelism both in Ps 78-^ and 
Wis. shoAvs ; cf. Jg 9'3, Ps 104". 

ii. In a number of passages, e.ff. Gn 16'"" 
oou. 14. w Ex 3^ Jg 21- * 5^ 6'!--'' 13^ mention is made 
of 'the angel of Jehovah,' AV the 'Lord' (J); 
and in others, e.g. Gn 21"i'' 31"", of ' the angel of 
God' (E). Similar passages are Gn 18. 322^-^^ com- 
pared with Hos 12*, Gn 48i'- ***. According to the 
general grammatical rule the rendering ' an angel 
of the Lord ' is inaccurate, though some instances 
may be doubtful ; so ' the angel of God ' necessarily 
Gn 31", and even 21", cf. v.i*. The angel of the 
Lord appears in human form, Gn 18, or in a flame 
of fire. Ex 3", or speaks to men out of heaven in a 
dream, Gn 31"-". It has been disputed whether 
' the angel of the Lord ' be one of the angels or 
J" Himself in self -manifestation. The manner in 
which he speaks leaves little room to doubt that 
the latter view is the right one : the angel of the 
Lord is a theophany, a self-manifestation of God. 
In Gn 31"- " the angel of God says, ' I am the God 
of Bethel ' ; in Ex 3''- ^ the angel of the Lord says, 
' I am the God of thy father ' . . . ' and Moses 
was afraid to look upon God'; cf. Jg IS^'*. In 
Gn 16^" the angel of tlie Lord saj's to Hagar, ' I 
will greatly multiply thy seed,' and 2p8 ' the angel 
of God called to Hagar out of heaven . . . lift up 
the lad ; for I will make him a great nation.' The 
angel identifies himself with God, and claims to 
exercise all the jirerogatives of God. Those also 
to whom the angel appears identify him with God : 
Gn 16^^* Hagar 'called the name of J" that had 
spoken to her, thou art a God that seest' (all- 
seeing) ; Gn 18 the angel is called ' the Lord ' ; 
Jg 6" it is said ' the anjjel of the Lord came,' but 
in vv."- " he is called directly ' the Lord ' ; Jg 13-'^ 
Manoah says, ' We shall surely die, for M'e have 
seen God.' And to name but one other passage, 
Gn 48'*- ", Jacob says, ' The God l)efore whom my 
fathers did walk, the God who hath fed me all my 
life long, the an^el which hath redeemed me from 
all evil, bless the lads.' On the other hand, the 
an^el of the Lord distinguishes between himself 
ano the Lord, just as the Lord distinguislies be- 
tM'cen Himself and the angel. The latter says to 
Hagar, Gn 16" 'J" hath heard thy affliction'^; cf. 
(in 22'". Nu 223> 'The Lord oi)ened the eyes of 
Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Lord ' ; and in 
Mai 3' the 'angel of the covenant' is different 
from J", and yet he is J" who cometh to His temple. 
So, on the other hand, the Lord .says, Ex 23^- =" ' I 
send an angel before thee,' and ' Mine angel shall 

go before thee' (Ex 32** 33='). But how these last 
passages are to be interpreted aijpears from 
Ex 33^'*- " (141") ' My face (I mvself) shall go with 
thee ' . . . ' if thy face (thou tnyself) go not with 
us, carry us not up hence.' The ' angel of His face * 
(presence) is not an angel who sees His face or 
stands before it, but one in whom His face (pre- 
sence) is reflected and seen ; cf. Ex 23"''^ ' My name 
(fulness of revealed Being, Is 30-'') is in him.' The 
Sept. rendering of Is G3^ 'not an ambassador' 
(reading n;f), 'nor an angel, but Himself (Heb. 
His face) saved them,' is scarcely the meaning of 
the original. The mere manifestation of J" creates 
a distinction between it and J", though the identity 
remains. The form of manifestation is, so to 
speak, something unreal (Dt 4^*- ^), a condescen- 
sion for the purpose of assuring those to whom it 
is granted that J" in His fulness is present with 
them. As the manifestation called the angel of 
the Lord occurred chielly in redemptive history, 
older theologians regarded it as an aaumbration or 
premonition of the incarnation of the second Per- 
son. This idea was just in so far as the angel of 
the Lord was a manifestation of J" on the earth in 
human fonn, and in so far as such tenij)orary 
manifestations might seem the prelude to a per- 
manent redemptive self-revelation in this form 
(Mai 31- 2) ; but it was to go beyond the OT, or at 
any rate beyond the understanding of OT writers, 
to found on the manifestation distinctions in the 
Godhead. The only distinction implied is that 
between J", and J" in manifestation. The angel of 
the Lord so fully represented or expressed J" that 
men had the assurance that when he spoke or 
acted among them J ' was speaking or acting. 

iii. As ' messengers ' (maVakim) sent to men, 
angels usually appear singly, but in Gn 19 two 
visit Lot ; Gn 28'^ ' the angels of God ' ascend and 
descend upon the ladder, and Gn 32' ' the angels 
of God ' meet Jacob, who says, ' this is God's host ' 
(lit. camp) ; ' and he called the name of the place 
Mahanaim' (two camps, or as 11 Vm plur., com- 
panies). In Job 1* 2^ the ' sons of God ' who present 
themselves to report upon their ministrations are 
numerous. Sometimes the plur. is used inde- 
finitely, as Ps 78*'* ' evil angels, 91" ' He shall give 
His angels charge over tliee,' Job 33-- ' tiie de- 
stroyers ' ; cf. 2 S 24^''- ". An":els do not usually, 
at least in early writings, mediate the phenomena 
of the physical Avorld, tliej' operate in the moral 
and redemptive sphere ; but the angel of the Lord 
smites with pestilence, 2 S 24 ; and with death, 
2 K 19^ ; and Satan, on special permission of God, 
sets the lightning and whirlwind in motion against 
Job, and smites him with sore boils, l'®- ^^ 2'. It 
is perhaps rather a poetical and realistic conception 
of tj^e special providence of God, though with 
reminiscences of early history, when it is said that 
the angel of the Lorcl encamps round about those 
that fear him, Ps 34', and thrusts down their 
enemies, Ps 35'- ®, and that the angels l>ear up in 
their hands the righteous, Ps 91", cf. Nu 20'". 
More literal is the statement that they interpret to 
the individual the meaning of God's afflictive pro- 
vidences in his life, Job 33**; and so Job 5' the 
idea is hazarded that they might interest them- 
selves in the afflictions of men and hear an apiwal 
from them, or perhaps intercede or mediate in 
their belialf. In Ezk and Zee the angels interpret 
divine visions given to men ; but see under § v. 
Passages referring to the intervention of angels 
are such as these : 2 S 24'«, 1 K 19»- ', 2 K 1" 19», 
Ezk 9^. In some of these cases it may be difficult 
to decide whether the angelic manifestation be not 
the angel of the Lord. The passages 1 S 29*, 
2 S 14"- *• 19" are also somewhat obscure. The 
first passage, where Achish says that David is 
good in his sight, might bo rendered ' as an angel 




of God,' that is, probably in valour (Zee 12*), 
wisdom (2 S 14^'- *'), and moral rectitude ; in the 
others the natural rendering is 'as the angel of 
God.' The art., however, in comparisons often 
designates the class, while our idiom uses the 
indef. art. ' an angel,' or the plur. ' the angels ' of 
God. The point in the comparison is the pene- 
tration and ^visdom of the angel, and reference 
might be to some such ideal being as is spoken of 
Job 15'- *. If allusion were to the historical ' angel 
of the Lord,' the original features of the phenome- 
non would have somewhat faded and the conception 
been generalised. 

iv. It belongs less to the sphere of redemptive 
history than to the conception of the majestj' of 
J" the King (Is 6'), w-hen God is represented as 
surrounded by a court^ heaven, by multitudes of 
ministers that do His pleasure, and armies that 
execute His commands. He has a 'council' {"vo 
Ps 89', cf . the four and twenty elders. Rev 4*) ; a 
' congregation ' (17;: Ps 82^ S75 Ps StF) surrounds 
Him, ' hosts ' who are His ministers (Is 6-, 1 K 22'*, 
Ps 103*- '-^ 148-). These superhuman beings are 
called ' sons of Elohim ' (Job 1® 2\ cf . Dn 3^), or 
' sons of Elim,' Ps 29^- ® 89*, but possibly simply 
' Elohim,' Ps 8= 97*. and ' Elim,' Ex 15". The 
rendering 'sons of God' is possible, and Ps 82® 
' sons of the Most High,' if said of angels, would be 
in favour of it ; but, on the other hand, the word 
Elim {z'iK) seems nowhere an honorary plur. 
applicable to a single being, but always denotes 
strict plurality. The probability, therefore, is that 
the right rendering is not ' sons of God,' but ' sons 
of the Elohim,' ' sons of the Elim,' that is, mem- 
bers of the class of beings called Elohim and Elim, 
just as ' sons of the prophets ' means members of 
the prophetic order or guilds (cf. sing. Dn 3-^). 
The names Elohim and El are prehistoric, and 
their etymology is quite unknown ; they are also 
the names for 'God,' and these beings around 
God's throne are no doubt conceived of in con- 
trast with men as sharing in an inferior way some- 
thing of di^-ine majesty. They are also called 
' Holy Ones ' {z'7r-.p), tliough the term ' holy,' 
originally at least, did not describe moral char- 
acter, but merely expressed close relation to God. 
Cf. Dt 33-, Zee 145, pg §97^ Jq]^ 51^ and often. The 
OT assumes the existence of these beings, and the 
belief goes back beyond the historic period. In- 
teresting attempts liave been made to explain the 
origin of the idea. It has been suggested that 
these beings, subordinate to J " and His servants, 
are the gods of the nations now degraded and 
reduced to a secondary place by the increasing 

1)revalence of the monotheistic conception in 
srael (Kosters, ThT, 1876). There is little or 
nothing in OT to support this theory. I^^iel 
probably specvdated little on the gods of the 
nations, except of those, such as Egv'pt and Baby- 
lon, with whom they came into contact ; and though 
J' be greater than all ^ods (Ex 18"), He nowhere 
regards them as His ministers, but manifests the 
strongest hostility to them, e.g. those of Egypt 
Ex 1212, I3 191 E2IJ. 3013^ of Babylon Is 21* 46»- », 
and generally Zeph 2". The monotheism of Israel 
did not subordinate the gods to J' as His ministers, 
but rather denied their existence, and described 
them as vanities (nonentities), Ps 96*-*, Jer lO*- ". 
The fact that J" is compared or contrasted vi-ith 
the sons of Elohim in heaven, Ps 89*®, and also 
with the Elohim or gods of the nations, Ps 86* 
96^* 97^ is certainly remarkable, but scarcely 
sufBcient to establish the identity of the two ; anH 
if in later times the idea finds expression that God 
had subjected the nations to the rule of angels, 
while the rule of Israel was reserved for Himself 
fDt 32»-9 in Sept., Sir 17", Dn lO^^-a) 121, cf. 
Dt 4" 29^^, Is 242'), this is hardly an old idea 

that the angels were the gods of the nations re- 
appearing in an inverted form, but a new idea 
sug":ested to Israel by its own religious superiority 
to tne nations, and perhaps its way of explaining 
heathenism. Another \ie\r goes back to what was 
presumably the oldest phase of Shemitic religion 
for an explanation. Men, conscious of being under 
the influence of a multitude of external forces, 
peopled the world with spirits, whose place of 
abode they thought to be great stones, umbra^- 
ous trees, fountains, and the like. Gradually 
these varied spirits came to be regarded as possess- 
ing a certain unity of wUl and action, and by a 
further concentration they became the sei^-ants of 
one supreme mtII, and formed the host of heaven. 
Such speculations regarding possible processes of 
thought amon^ the family out of which Israel 
sprang, in periods which precede the dawn of 
history, are not T*-ithout interest ; they lie, how- 
ever, outside OT, which, as has been said, assumes 
the existence of J'"s heavenly retinue. The God 
of Israel is above all things a living God, who 
influences the aflairs of the world and men, and 
rules them. If He uses agents, they are supplied 
by the * ministers ' that surround Him. This is 
true (though denied by Kosters) even in the oldest 
period of the literature, Gn 28 and 32, Jos 5^^ and 
Is 6, where one of the seraphim ministers purifica- 
tion and forgiveness to the prophet ; and the same 
appears in the scene depicted in 1 K 22^. The 
idea is even more common in the later literature : 
Ps 1032"- 21. J'"s hosts are also ministers who do His 
pleasure, Ps 148^. In Job 1® 2^ it is the sons of the 
Elohun who present themselves to report upon the 
condition of the earth and men ; in 3S^ the inter- 

Ereting angel is one among a thousand (5^), and 4" 
is ' servants ' are also his ' angels ' (messengers). 
Naturally, however, as the idea of ministering 
hosts belong to the conception of J* as sovereign, 
some of the breadth with which the idea is ex- 
pressed may be due to the poetical religious ima- 
gination, as when Gkni's warriors are represented 
as mighty in strength, Ps lOS^*; as 'heroes' with 
whom He descends to do battle with the nations, 
Jl 3", Zee 145 ; as myriads of chariots, Ps 68"^ ; 
and as chariots and horsemen of fire, 2 K 6^*- ", 
Is 66^, Dt 332, Dn 7^*. (On the other hand, Hab 3*, 
God's chariots and horses are the storm clouds.) 
In particular, these hosts accompany J " in His self- 
revelation for judgment and salvation, Dt 33^ 
Zee 14', Jl 3", and in NT this trait is transferred 
to the pa rousia of Christ (Mt 25*^). It is less cer- 
tain whether the divine name J" (God) of hosts be 
connected with these angelic hosts ; it is, at any 
rate, a title correlative, expressing the majesty 
and omnipotence of J' (Sept. often rarroKpdTup). 
Finally, to men's eyes the myriads of stars, clothed 
in light and moving across the heavens, seemed 
animated, and there was a tendency to identify 
theni with the angelic host — an identmcation made 
easier by the belief that man's life was greatly 
under t&e influence of the stars (Job 38^). In 
Job 38" the morning stars are identical with the 
sons of the Elohim. Cf. Jg 5^, Is 14'2 24*i 40=*, 
and on 'host of heaven' 2 K 17»« 21», Jer 19", 
Zeph 1'. The idea that the stars are angels re- 
ceives large development in the Book of Enoch, 
e.g. 18^"^®, and even Rev 9^ " a star and the angel 
of the abyss are identified. 

v. About the time of the Exile and after the 
Return a manner of thinking appears which, 
though from the phraseology used it might seem 
a development in angelology, is really rather a 
movement in the direction of hypostatising the 
Spirit of God. In the older period, as that of the 
Judges, J" rules His people through His Spirit, 
which inspires the leaders who judge and save 
Israel. And in the older prophets the Spirit 




operates within the prophet, who is enabled to | 
conceive J'"s purposes and operations in thought 
and express tliem in language. IJut in Ezk 40 seq. 
'a man' accompanies the prophet and explains to 
him his vision. This ' man ' is the prophetic spirit 
objectivised. Even before tiiis time, in Micah's 
vision, 1 K 22'-', ' the spirit ' who comes forth is 
the spirit of prophecy personified. The process is 
carried a step f urtner in Zee : not only is the 
prophetic spirit hypostatised as ' the angel that 
spake with me' (I"-" 2*), but the operations of J" 
among the nations are personified as horsemen and 
chariots. That which in the older prophets was 
an inward spirit and thoughts, has become an 
'angel,' and symbolical agencies which the 'angel' 
interprets. But that much of this at least is 
more religious symbolism than strict angelology 
appears from the visions in 1'* 5*' *. It is, how- 
ever, the Spirit of God— not only as spirit of 
prophecy, but in general, as God in operation, 
controlling the destinies of the nations and of His 
people — that is chiefly symbolised in Zee. This is 
most broadly seen in ch. 4, which is strangely 
misread when the seven lamps are supposed to 
represent the light shed by God's people, their 
spiritual life. The seven lamps are the seven eyes 
oi the Lord (4^°), and the seven eyes are the seven 
spirits (the manifold spirit) of God. To be com- 
pared is Rev 1*, where the salutation comes from 
God and Christ and the seven spirits ; Rev 4' ' there 
were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, 
which are the seven spirits of God ' ; and Rev 8*^ ' a 
lamb having seven eyes, which are the seven 
spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.' Zee 4 
is an expansion of 3", and its purpose is to sym- 
bolise that Spirit of (lod which goes out over all 
the earth, controls the history of the nations in 
the interest of His people, and secures the com- 
pletion of the temple, which the Lord shall enter 
and abide in, when He removes the iniquity of the 
land in one day (3*) — not by might nor by power, 
but by My Spirit (4*). The two olive trees, ' sons 
of oil (cf. Is 5' a hill, the son of oil = an ' oily ' hill), 
stand beside the Lord of the whole earth, i.e. in 
heaven, cf. 6', and cannot be Joshua and Zerub- 
babel. Whether the duality of the trees expresses 
some idea in the prophet's mind obscure to us, or 
whether it be merely part of the symmetry of the 
symbol, may remain undecided. Other writings 
of this period "ive prominence to the Spirit of God, 
Jl 2^, and show a tendency to hypostatise it, 
la 63'»-" 48i«, Gn P, Ezk 2^ S^, Ps 139'. The 
' angel of the Lord ' in Zee. has the same double 
aspect as elsewhere, and as the angel of the cove- 
nant in Mai, cf. 1" with 31*. 

vi. Two further developments complete what is 
said in OT of angels — (1) a moral distinction appears 
amon^ the angels ; and (2) a distinction of rank. 
The first distinction is not carried far, and the 
second naturally follows from the idea of an army 
or host. In the earliest period angels seem morally 
neutral, they are so much the messengers of God 
and the medium of His relation to the world that 
their own character does not come into question. 
They have always something of the meaning of an 
impersonal phenomenon, Jehovah's operations or 
providence made visible and sensible. Of course 
the angel of the Lord being Jehovah's ' face,' and 
embodying His 'name,' exhibits also His moral 
nature. Ex 2.3*"*^. But 'evil' angels are angels 
who execute judgment, Ps 78**, Job 33-'^. The 
spirit from Goa who troubled Saul is called ' evil ' 
merely from the eflects m hich he produces, 1 S 16". 
In 1 iv 22 even the personified spirit of projdiecy 
becomes 'a lying spirit,' just as elsewhere J" Him- 
self deceives the propliets, Ezk 14*. In writings 
of the age of the Captivity, and later, however, a 
being appears called the Satan (opposer, accuser). 

one of the sons of the Elohim, who displays hos- 
tility to the saints and people of God, Job 1* 2', 
Zee 3. Even in these books he has as yet little 
personal reality. He is a voice ' bringing sin to 
remembrance' before God. The scene Zee 3 is 
greatly symbolical. The evil conscience of the 
people and their fear, suggested by their miserable 
condition, that their sins still lay on them, and that 
God's favour had not yet returned to them, ajre 
symbolised by the accusing Satan ; while the angel 
of the Lord is God's own voice assuring them of 
His gracious favour. There is perhaps an advance 
on the idea of Satan in Job, though even there he 
finds no place in the denouement of the drama. In 
two ways, perhaps, the conception of evil angels 
became clearer : first, it was natural that the 
accusing angel should tak^ on something of the 
nature of his office, and appear as the enemy of 
the saints and of Israel. This step seems already 
taken in Job. And, secondly, there was always a 
greater disinclination to ascribe moral evil in men 
to God. In no part of OT is God represented as 
the primary author of evil thoughts or actions in 
men ; if He instigate them to evil, it is in punishment 
or aggravation of evil they have already committed. 
But at a later time the instigation to evil freely 
ascribed in earlier times to God (1 S 26", 1 K 22-") 
is attributed to Satan, cf. 2 S 24' with I Ch 2 P. 
Further development hardly appears in OT. Tiie 
'serpent' of Gn 3 is identified with Satan in Wis 
2-* and in NT. In Dt 32", Ps 106^7 mention is 
made of 'demons' (Dne*), which, however, appear 
to be the false gods to which children were sacri- 
ficed, 1 Co 10^. In Assyr. shtdu is the name given 
to the inferior deities represented by the bull- 
colossus. Popular imagination peopled the desert 
with demons, Is 13^1 34", among which was a night- 
spectre, Lilith ; and to the same category possibly 
belongs Azazel (AV scapegoat), to whom the live 
goat was consigned on the Day of Atonement (cf. 
Zee 5"), Lv 1&-^J>-^ (Enoch W), although this is by 
no means certain. These demons, however, do not 
belong to the angelic host, and lie outside the moral 
world. Relatively to God, the angels, though the 
purest beings, are imperfect, Job 4'** 15'* 25*. 

In Dn 10''- ^- 2' the various countries have 
their guardian or patron angels, Michael being 
the prince of Israel (Jude *, Rev 12^) ; later 
theology reckoned seventy of these angels (Dt 
32^, Gn 46^). And in Is 24 the universal wicked- 
ness of the world appears laid at the door of its 
rulers, whether angelic or human, and the judg- 
ment of God falls on ' the host of the high ones on 
high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth ' 
(vv.-i- 22) J and many interpret Ps 58. 82 of the same 
angelic rulers. Apart from the idea suggested in 
§ iv., several things led to this conception of patron 
and ruling angels. First, there was a tendency 
towards removing God far from any immediate 
contact with the earth and men, and to introduce 
intermediaries betAveen them who mediated His 
rule. In Dn He no longer speaks to men directly, 
but only by the intervention of angels, who even 
interpret His written word to men (O^**^-). And, 
secondly, there was a tendency to personify abstract 
conceptions such as the 'spirit' or a nation, and a 
further tendency to locate these personified forces 
in the supersensible world, from whence they ruled 
the destinies of men. The issues of the conflicts 
of the kingdoms of Persia, Greece, and Judali 
with one another on earth are all determined 
by the relations of their ' princes ' in heaven ; and 
this idea is a ruling one in the Apoc. It belongs 
to a ditlerent class of conceptions when conflicts 
are referred to between God and other powerful 
beings. Such beings are ' the Sea,' ' Rahab,' 
'Tannin' or the Dragon, the 'Serpent,' 'Leviathan,* 
etc., conip. Is 51»-i», Pa SO""'*, Job O'^ 26i-- 's (Ps 



87^ Is 30^), Ps 74'-'-''-', Is 27> (Job 40^-^, Ps 6S«), Job 
7", Am ff"-* (Ezk 293;« 32--8) ; also Job 25'' 'He 
maketh peace in His hi^h places.' These passages 
contain reminiscences of Cosmic or Creation myths, 
victories of God, the principle of light and order, 
over the primeval darkness and raging watery 
chaos. They are referred to in order to magnify 
the power oif God, and to invoke it against some 
foe of His people, wliich in its rebellion and 
menacing attitude recalls God's ancient enemies, 
and may be described under their names (lo 27^). 
In Gn 6^^'* ' the sons of the Elohim ' can hardly be 
anything but a part of the heavenly host, who fell 
through love of the daughters of men, as was 
already understood by Josephus (cf. To 3^ 6"). The 
passage has no other points of contact in OT, but is 
greatly amplified in Enoch 6-15, etc.; and there, as 
well as in NT, the idea of the fallen angels appears 
combined with what is said of the imprisonment of 
angelic mlers. Is 24^ (2 P 2*, Jude *). 

Ranks among the angels appear in Dn, and 
there for the first time some of them receive names. 
In OT and NT only two are named — Michael, 
prince of Israel {W^-^ 12i, Jude \ Rev 12"), and 
Gabriel (Dn 8i« 9^1, Lk V^-^). Michael is named 
' the archangel,' Jude ^ and 1 Th 4^* ' the arch.' is 
spoken of, though not named. Seven such angelic 
princes are spoken of, To 12^' ' I am Raphael, one 
of the seven holy angels ' ; in Enoch and 2 Es 5^ 
Uriel is named rs fourth. The number seven 
already appears in Ezk 9-, and there is no necessity 
to refer it to Pers. influence. In Bab. writings, 
grades among the celestial beings are referred to 
(Schrader, Hollenfahrt der Istar, pp. 102, 103), one 
class of whom Lenormant calls archanrfes cdestes. 
According to Jewish tradition the names of the 
angels came from Babylon. 

vii. There is little advance over Daniel in the 
angelology of the Apocrypha. Raphael accom- 
panies Tobias as a guide. As one of the seven holy 
angels he ' presents the prayers of the saints ' (To 
12^', cf. Rev 8*), and says, ' I did bring the memorial 
of your prayer before the Holy One' (12*^). A 
'good' angel is spoken of. To 5^, 2 Mac 11®. 
Raphael binds the demon Asmodaeus, To 8^ and 
the sentence of judgment on those who brin^ 
false accusations against the innocent is received 
and executed by the an^el of God (Sus ^- ^) ; the 
angels are 'blessed,' and are called on to praise 
God, ' Let all Thy angels and Thine elect bless 
Thee ' (To 8^^) ; and the sins of men cannot be 
hidden before God and His angels (2 Es 16*). 
Neither is there in principle any great development 
in NT. (1) The angels form an innumerable host, 
Lk 29- 13, Mt 2653, He 12^, Rev 5" ; they are the 
armies of heaven, Rev 12^ 19"-". (2) They are 
beings glorious in appearance, Lk 2^, Mt 283, Ac 
12^, and in rank are 'glories,' Jude ^. (3) They 
minister to the saints. He 1", Mt 2^3 4", Lk 22*3, 
Ac 519 8^ 12'' ; they are the medium of revelation, 
Rev P 22'®, and carry the saints into paradise, Lk 
1622, (>f 2 K 2". (4) As in OT theophany God 
was surrounded by angels, so they accompany the 
Son of Man at His parotisia, Mt 16-"^ 253i, I Th 418, 
2 Th 1^ (Mt 13«-^ 2431). In two or three points 
there seems an advance over OT. («) The angels 
are spirits. He 1". (b) Satan is no longer isolated, 
but has a retinue of angels, Mt 25*^, Rev 12^. (c) 
Ranks in the angelic host are more distinctly 
suggested. Col 2^", Eph 3^" (1 Co 15^^ Eph l^i). 
(d) In the Apoc. angels are associated with cosmic 
or elemental forces, as fire and water, which they 
direct or into which they are changed. Rev 14'^ 16*, 
cf. Ps 104*. Christians are made along \nth Christ 
better than the angels, whom they shall judge. 
He 2', 1 Co 63. Ansel worship is condemned, Col 
2i», Rev 19i»228-9, cf. Dt 61*, Mt 4i». The second 
Nicene Council decreed that Xarpela ought not to 

VOL. I. — 7 

be offered to angels, but allowed SovXtia. The 
sense in which the Sadducees denied angels and 
spirits (Ac 23*) is not quit« clear. The Sadducees 
received the written Scriptures, but disallowed 
the oral developments upheld by the Pharisees 
and scribes ; and it is possible that they re- 
pudiated only that more modem luxuriant angel- 
ology current in their day, without questionmg 
the ancient angelophanies. The great historical 
and ritual writing P contains no reference to 
angels : the Torah contained the revelation of 
God's whole will, and expressed all His relations 
to the world and men : special intervention of God 
was not now needed. And this may have been the 

Eosition of the Sadducees. On the other hand, 
rom the Sadducean inclination to freethinking, 
inherited from the pre-Maccabsean Gr. period, it is 
possible that they interpreted the angelophanies of 
the written Scriptures received by them in a 
rationalistic way as personified natural forces. 

Literature. — Kosters, ' Het ontstaan der Angelologie onder 
Israel,' ThT, 1876, etc. ; Kohut, Die Judisehe Angelologie u. 
Ddnumoloaie, Leipz. 1S*j6 ; Weber, Syxtem der Alt»ynagogalen 
Paldst. Theologie, Leipz. 1880. See also Fuller, Excursus on 
Angelology and Demonologi/, Speaker's Apocr. vol. i. p. 171 ff. 

A. B. Davidson. 

angels are men, they cannot be less than bishops 
ruling their several churches. In favour of this 
we have — (1) Mai 2^ 3^, where the words may be 
used of men ; (2) the "vz^ n'^?, who, however, was 
not an officer of the synagogue, but one of the 
congregation called up for the occasion to pronounce 
the prayer ; (3) the settled character of episcopacy 
in Asia in the time of Ignatius. Against it are — 
(1) dyyeXoi, never used of men in NT, except Lk 9'^ 
Ja 2'^ of ordinary messengers; (2) the figurative 
character of the Apoc. generally, and of this part 
in particular. There are seven angels for seven 
churches ; and from the Saviour walking in a 
figurative tabernacle each of them receives a letter in 
figurative form, and full of figurative promises and 
threats. Whatever be said of the ' Nicolaitans,' 
'that woman Jezebel ' (2*^) can hardly be other than 
figurative. Even if the allusion is to a li\-ing 
prophetess, its form is figurative ; esp. if we read 
T7IV yivaiKd cov — thy wife Jezebel ; (3) the relation 
of the angels to the churches is one of close identi- 
fication in praise and blame, to an extent for which 
no human ruler can be responsible; (4)' settled 
monarchical government of churches in Asia can 
hardly date back to the Neronian persecution, or 
even to Domitian's. 

The imagery is suggested by the later Jewish 
belief in angels as guardians of nations (e.g. Dn 
12^) and of men (Ac 12i'), like the genii of paganism. 
As, however, this belief is nowhere definitely con- 
firmed by Scripture, the angels are best regarded 
as personifications of their churches. 


ANGER, as a verb, occurs Ps 10632 'They a«i 
him also ('S'Vp!!) at the waters of strife,' and Ro 
1019 ' i)y a foolish nation I will a. (TrapopyiQ)) you.' 
And twice in Apocr. : Sir 3^® 'And he that a*^ 
(RV 'provoketh') his mother is cursed of God'; 
19^1 ' he &^^ him that nourisheth him ' ; to which 
RV adds Wis 5^ ' The water of the sea shall be a"^ 
(AV 'rage') against them.' J. Hastixgs. 

ANGER (WRATH) OP GOD. — Anthropopathi- 
cally described in OT by terms derived from the 
physical manifestations of human anger, '■^*, nzn, 
ji-in, .-p?;;, f^-^-;), etc. ; in NT by the terms 6pYh, 
6v/j.6i, anger or wrath may be defined generally 
as an energy of the divine nature called forth by 
the presence of daring or presumptuous trans- 
gression, and expressing the reaction of the divine 
holiness against it in the punishment or destruction 



of the trant^essor. It is tlie 'zeal' (•"'VJP) of God 
for the maintenance of His holiness and honour, 
and of the ends of His ri'^htcousness and love, 
when these are threatened by the ingratitude, 
rebellion, and wilful disobedience or temerity of 
t(he creature. In this light it appears both in 
the OT {passim) and in the NT (Mt S', Jn 3^, Ro 
1", Enh 5", Ilev 19'* etc.), and is uniformly repre- 
sented as something very terrible in its elfects. It 
is srxiken of as ' kindled ' by the sins and provoca- 
tions of men (Ex 4'S Nu IP "^ Dt 29", 2 S (i\ Is d'^ 
etc. ), as ' poured out ' on men (Ps 79«, Is 42^, Jer 44« 
etc. ) ; its ' fierceness ' is dwelt upon by psalmists 
and pronhets (Ps 18*» 88'«, Is 13«, Jer 25"- "» 
etc.); it burns down to the lowest Sheol (Dt 32^^). 
Similarly, in NT, God is represented as ' a con- 
suming lire' (He 12-*; cf. Mt 3'^ I3^^ 2 Th 1« 
2*). At the same time, this a. is not pictured, as 
in heathen religions, as the mere outburst of 
capricious passion, but always aj)pear8 in union 
with the idea of the divine holiness (that principle, 
as Martensen says, ' which guards the eternal 
distinction between Creator and creature, between 
God and man, in the union efl'ected between them, 
and preserves the divine dignity and majesty 
from being infringed on,' and which on its positive 
side is in God the inflexible determination to 
uphold at all costs the interests of righteousness 
and truth) ; and as directed to the maintenance of 
the moral order in the world, and specially to the 
upholding of the covenant relation Avith Israel, an 
aspect of it which manifests its close alliance with 
righteousness and love. As in the human sphere, 
so in the divine, the keenest provocation to a. is 
that which lies in wounded or frustrated love, or 
in injury done to the objects of love (Nu 32''*- ^^, 
2 K 17"-^», Ezk 23, Am 3^, Ps V^ etc.). A. 
in God has thus always an ethical connotation, 
and manifests itself in subserviency to ends of 
righteousness and mercy, by w hich also its measure 
or limit is prescribed (Jer 10"). In its action in 
providence, it uses as its instruments the a":encies 
of nature, as well as the passions and ambitious 
designs of men (cf. Is 10* ' O Assyrian, the rod of 
mine a.'), and afflicts the disobedient and rebellious 
with the calamities of war, famine, pestilence, and 
with evils generally (Dt 28^'^'^^, Am 4^-''-^ etc. 
See analysis m Ritschl, llccht. unci Vcr.^ ii. p. 125). 
So far. accordingly, as the Biblical representa- 
tions are concerned, the divine a. or wrath is not to 
be weakened down, or explained away, as is the 
fashion amtmg theologians (e.g. Origen, Augustine, 
Turretin), into a mere 'anthropomorphism,' or 
general expression for God's aversion to sm, and His 
determination to punish it ; but is rather to be re- 
carded as a very real and awful affection of the 
divine nature, fitted to awaken fear in the minds of 
men (Ps 2"-i2, He lO^i). When we look to the 
historical development of this doctrine in Scripture, 
we find nothing to modify materially the repre- 
sentations just given. No real distinction can be 
predicated between the earlier and later descrip- 
tions of the divine wrath in OT, except that, as 
Kitschl points out (Recht. und Ver. ii. p. 127), they 
tend in the prophets to become more eschatological 
(see Day of the Lord; cf. Ro 2«, Rev 6"). 
This, however, is not to be understood as if the 
divine wrath were not also manifested continuously 
through history in the punishment of those whose 
evil-doing calls it forth (Ps 7"). The later repre- 
sentations in the Scripture are every whit as 
strongly conceived as those of an earlier date. When 
H. Schultz speaks of ' the impression of the terrible 
God of the Semites' in tne earlier ages, and 
says, ' the ancient Hebrews, too, tremble before a 
mysterious wrath of God ' (O.T. Theology, ii. p. 175, 
Eng. tr.), he strangely forgets that the passages 
he cites are, on his own hypothesis, from the very 

latest parts of the Pent. (Lv W, Nu l"* 18"; 
cf. Ex 1212 W, Nu 8"~all from P). The Book 
of Genesis, remarkably enough, has no men- 
tion of the wrath of God, though its equivalent is 
there in repeated manifestations of God s judgment 
on sin (expulsion from Eden, cursing of the ground, 
flaming sword, the Flood, So<lom and Gomorrah, 
etc.). Ritschl's view of the Biblical develojmient 
has features of its own. He riglitly conceives of 
wrath as connected with tlie divine holiness, but 
would interpret the latter attribute as expressing 
originally only the notion of God as the exalted, 
powerful, unapproachable One, to draw near to 
whom would mean instant destruction for the 
creature ; and sees the peculiar manifestation of 
wrath, accordingly, under OT conditions, in a 
sudden, unexi)ectea, and violent destruction of the 
life of those who had violated the obligations of 
the covenant (liecM. und Ver. ii. pp. 93, 125, 135, 
136). We can only urge in reply that there is no 
stage in the OT revelation in which the ideas of 
transcendence over the world, and of moral i)er- 
fectiou, are not already united in the conception of 
holiness. The instances which most readily suggest 
an outburst of destructive energy apart from moral 
considerations, are those in which individuals or 
companies are smitten for what may seem very 
slight faults, or acts of inadvertence (e.g. 1 S 4^*- *", 
2 S 2^). But even in these instances a careful 
examination will show that it is the moral sanctity 
of the divine character which is the ground of the 
special awfulness with which it is invested. 

When, finally, we pass from tlie OT to the 
NT, we find that the notion of God's wrath is 
not essentially altered, though the revelation of 
love and grace which now tills the vision places it 
comparatively in the background. The Marcionite 
view, which would represent the contrast between 
the God of the OT and the God of the NT as 
that between a wrathful avenging Deity and a 
loving Father who is incapable of anger, is, on 
the face of it, incorrect. The pitying, fatherly 
character of God is not absent from OT (Ex 34*- ', 
Ps 103^^), but, even there, is rather the primary 
basis of God's self-revelation, to which the mani- 
festation of wrath and judgment is su}x)rdinate. He 
is 'slow to a.' (Ps 103' et al.), and ' fury (w. ) is not 
in' Him (Is 27'*). On the other hand, Vhe fatherly 
love of God in NT does not exclude the aspect of 
Him as 'Judge' (1 P V), and 'a consuming fire' 
(He 12^), whose wrath is a terrible reality, from 
which Christ alone can save us (Jn 3^, Ro V^-^^ 
59, 1 Th P" etc.). In tliis connexion Ritschl 
labours hard to show that 'wrath' in NT has 
(as in OT prophets) uniformly an eschatological 
reference, and does not apply to the present con- 
dition. He goes even further, and challenges its 
right to a place in the Christian system at all. 
' The notion of the affection of wrath in God,' he 
says, ' has no religious worth for Christians, but is 
an unfixed and formless theologoumenon'(7v'ecA<. 
^md Ver. ii. p. 154). It is no doubt true that the 
eschatological aspect of wrath is prominent in NT ; 
and that for the reason already given the wrath of 
God throughout recedes into the background, and 
becomes, as it were, an attribute in reserve (Ro 
2'', 3^) ; but many indications warn us that it is 
07jIi/ in reserve, and is still there in its unchanged 
character, and rests with its heaA-y weight upon 
the disobedient (Jn 3^, Eph 2--^); nay, that in a 
most real sense its effects are manifest in the terrible 
retributions for sin exacted from men even here 
(Mt 23=*»- =*«, Ro pi-32, Ac 5'-" etc.). And if the objec- 
tion is urged, as it will be by many, that the attri- 
bution of wrath or anger to God (otherwise than 
as the reflection of the sinner's distrustful thoughts 
regarding Him) is an imworthy mode of con- 
ception, and derogates from the divine perfection, 




it may at least with equal justice be replied that 
a Ruler of the universe who was incapable of 
being moved with an intense moral indignation at 
sin, and of putting forth, when occasion required, 
a destroying energy against it, would be lacking 
in an essential element of moral perfection ; nor 
would either the righteousness or the mercy of 
such a Being have any longer a substantive value. 

LiTKRaTiRK. — VTeber Vom Zome Gotte*, 1862 ; Ritschl De 
Ira Dei, 1S59, Beeht. und Ver. u. w>. 89-148 ; Odikr Theolom 
<^ O.T. i. pp. 154-16S (Eng. tr.); Scbolu O.T. Ttttolon.u. 
pp. 167-179 ; D. W. Sonon The Redemption of ITon— du t. 
'The Anger of Ck>d' ; Dale The AUmeinent, Lect THI. ; Lux 
Mundi, pp. 235-288. J. OrK. 

INGLE occurs onlv as a subst., Is 19* 'all they 
that, cast a. into the l)rooks ' ; Hab 1" ' They take 
up all of them with the a.' In Job 4P, the only- 
other occurrence of the Heb. word (n?n), the tr. is 
' hook ' (RV ' fish-hook '). See FiSHlXG. 

J. Hastings. 


ANIAM (ci"a? 'lament of people'). — A man of 
Manasseh (1 Ch 7^*). See Gene-ILOGT. 

ANIM (c'j;), Jos IS* only. — A toTSTi of Judah, 
in the mountains near Eshtemoh. It seems prob- 
able that it is the present double ruin of Ghuwein, 
west of Eshtemoh. The Heb. and Arab, guttural 
letters are equivalent. In the 4th cent. A.D. 
{Onomasticon , s.v. Anab and Astemte) Anea or 
Anem is noticed as a large towTi near Eshtemoh ; 
and there were two places so called. It is identi- 
fied (*.t\ Anim) with the town now in question. 
All the inhabitants were then Christians. See 
SWP vol. iiL sheet xxiv. C. R. CoxDER. 

ANIMAL KINGDOM.— See Natural History. 

ANISE {cLvTfdoi', anethum). — There can be no 
reasonable doubt that imidw is the classical name 
of Anethum graveolens, L., which is translated in 
EV (ilt 23'^) anise. There is the direct evidence 
of Rabbi Eliezer (Tract. Maaseroth, c. iv. 5) that 
the seeds, leaves, and the stem of dill are ' subject 
to tithe.' Dill is in the Talm. shabath. It is 
known in Arab, by the cognate name shibith, 
and is much cultivated in Pal. and Syria. The 
seeds of it are used in cookery as a condiment, 
esp. with beans and other seeds of the pulse 
kind, and their flavour is greatly liked by 
the natives of Egypt, Pal., Syria, and the East 
generally. It is also used by the natives as a 
carminative. Avicenna speaks thus of its ^^^tttes 
(ii. 258): 'calmant for griping, carminative 
diminishes swelling, and its infusion is beneficial 
as a wash to indolent ulcers. Its oU is useful in 
joint affections and neuralgias, and also as a 
hypnotic. Its juice calms pain in the ear. Eaten 
for a long time it injures the sight. The plant 
and its seed are galactogogues, but are esp. useful 
in over-distension of the stomach and flatulency. 
Its oil is also beneficial in ha?morrhoids.' 

Dill is an annual or biennial herb, of the order 
Umbellifene, ^Wth a stem one to three feet high, 
much dissected leaves, small vellow flowers, and 
flattened oval fruits about one-hf th of an inch long, 
of a brownish colour, with a lighter-coloured wing- 
like border, and a pungent, aromatic odour and 
taste. It is found wild in cornfields in central and 
southern Europe and Egypt, perliaps escaped from 
cultivation. It has been cultivated from remote 

The opinion of the translators of AV, in favour 
of anise (Pimpinella anisum, L.), is hardly to be 
weighed against the direct evidence above adduced 
for the identity of dill with ipi^or. RV gives dill 
in the margin. G. E. Post. 

ANKLE-CHAINS (nhy?, Arab. *a/d*i7, AV 'orna- 
ments of the legs,' Is 3*). — The prophet refers to 
the practice of joining the anklets by a short chain, 
to produce a stilted, affected gait in walking. 

G. M. IflACKIE. 

ANKLETS (!re?e. Arab. khalakhU, Is 3", AV 
'tinkling ornaments.')— The ref. is to the metal 
twists and bangles of bracelet-like design worn on 
the ankles of Oriental women, esp. of the Bedawin 
and fellahin class. The musical clink of the 
anklets and their ornaments, which to the wearied 

paasant on the rough mountain path has the 
refreshment of the bells to the baggage animals, 
is here alluded to as a social vulgarism when 
affected by the ladies of the upper classes, and as 
one of the marks of an artificial and unhealthy 
tone of life. G. M. Mackie. 

ANNA ("AjTra, the same name as the Heb. Jr}/n 
Hannah, from a root meaning 'grace'). — 1. The 
wife of Tobit : ' I took to wife A. of the seed of 
our own family' (To 1**-). See Tobit. 2. A 
prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe 
of Asher (Lk 2*"**). This genealogical notice 
makes it clear that, though Asher was not 
one of the ten tribes which returned to Pales- 
tine after the Babylonian Captivity, indi\-idual 
members of the tribe had done so ; and further, 
that Anna belonged to a family of suffi«ent dis- 
tinction to have presei^ed its genealogy. In the 
same connexion it is interesting to notice that 
the tribe of Asher alone is celebrated in tradition 
for the beauty of its women, and their fitness to be 
wedded to the high priest or king (for authorities, 
see Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, vol. i. p. 200). 
Of Anna's personal history all that we know is 
contained in the brief statement of St. Luke. She 
had been married for seven years, and at the time 
spoken of was not merely, as the AV suggests, 
eighty-four years old, but, according to the more 
correct rendering of the RV, 'had been a widow 
even for fourscore and four years ' ; so that, 
supposing her to have been married at fourteen, 
she would now be about a hundred and five. 
Throughout her long widowhood she had 'departed 
not from the temple,' not in the sense of actually 
li^'ing there — for that would have been impossible, 
most of all for a woman — but as taking part in all 
the temple services, ' worshipping, with fastings 
and supplications ni^ht and day.' It was thus 
that she sought to give expression to the longing 
which was filling her heart for the coming of the 
promised ilessiah, and at length her faith and 
patience were rewarded. In the child Jesus she 
was allowed to see the fulfilment of God's promise 
to His ancient people, and henceforth was able to 
announce to all like-minded with herself the 
' redemption,' as distinguished from the political 
deliverance of Jerusalem. G. MiLLlGAK. 

ANNAS ('Ajvas, ]jn 'merciful.' Josephus'Aroi'oi). 




— 1. Son of Seth, appointed high priest A.D. 6 
or 7 by the legate Quirinius, and deposed A.D 15 
by the procurator Valerius (iratus (Jos. Ant. xvill. 
ii. 1 , 2). Ho thus lost of lice, but not power. ' They 
say that this elder Ananus was most fortunate ; for 
he had five sons, and it happened that they all held 
the office of hi}^h priest to God, and he had himself 
enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which 
had never hapjiened to any other of our high 
priests' (Jos. Ant. XX. ix. 1). We learn also from 
St. John (18'-') that Joseph Caiaphas, hi^^h priest 
A.D. 18-36, was his son-in-law. The irnmense 
wealth of these Sadducean aristocrats was, in part 
at least, derived from 'the booths of the sons of 
Annas,' which monopolised the sale of all kinds of 
materials for sacrifice. These booths, according to 
Edersheira (Life and Times of the Messiah, iii. 5), 
occupied part of the temple court; D6renbourg 
(Essai sur I'histoirc, etc. , de la Palestine, p. 465 sqq. ) 
with more probability identifies them with four 
booths on the Mount of Olives, a branch establish- 
ment of which might have been beneath the temple 
porches. It was the sons of Annas who made God's 
house 'a den of robbers' ; and the Talmudic curse, 
' Woe to the house of Annas ! woe to their serpent- 
like hi8.sinra ! ' (or whisperings) (Pes. 57a), almost 
re-echoes tlie Saviour's denunciations. Josephus, 
too (A7it. XX. ix. 2-4), gives a vivid picture of the 
insolent rapacity and violence of the younger 
Ananus. Moreover, 'forty years before the de- 
struction of the temple the Sanhedrin banished 
itself from the chamber of hewn stone (rrnn n^-^h), 
and established itself in the booths ' (nv»n) (D6ren- 
bourg, p. 465), subsequently moving ' from the 
booths to Jerusalem ' (Rosh ha-Sh. 31a), perhaps 
when the booths were destroyed, three years before 
the destruction of the temple, in the same year 
in which the younger Ananus was murdered. 
Such and so powerful was the faction of which 
Annas was the liead. The NT consistently 
reflects this state of things. Jesus, when arrestee!, 
is brought to Annas first (Jn 18'*). He takes the 
leading part in the trial of the apostles (Ac 4^). 
That Annas is styled ' the high priest ' (Ac 4^ and 
probably Jn IS'"-*^) is not remarkable, since it is 
quite in accordance with the usage of Josephus, 
who applies the title, not only to the actual holder 
of the office, but also to all his living predecessors 
(Vit. 38; BJn. xii. 6; IV. iii. 7, 9, 10; IV. iv. 3). 
And in both Josephus and NT the more in- 
fluential members of those families from which 
high priests were chosen are all called Apxiepeh. 
But the phrase ' ^irl ipxifp^us "Ai/va Kal Kal'd<pa, in 
the high priesthood of A. and C (Lk 3^), seems 
unparalleled. Ewald {B.I. vol. vi. p. 430, n. 3) 
conjectures that it is due to the fact that when 
the author wrote, ' they had become memorable in 
this association through the history of Christ's 
death.' The chief interest in Annas centres in the 
notice of him in Jn 18, which is complementary 
to the narrative of St. Luke, and corrects an 
apparent mistake made by St. Matthew and St. 
Mark. The first two evangelists obscurely indicate 
two stages in the trial of Jesus (Mt26'^ 27S Mk 14*^ 
15'), but they transfer the events of the morning 
meeting of the Sanhedrin to the previous night. 
St. Luke avoids this apparent mistake, and leaves 
room (22"") for such an informal inquiry as that of 
Annas really was. 

When we*bear in mind the predominant influence 
of the man, and the unscrupulousness of the whole 
proceeding, it seems unnecessaiy to suppose that 
Annas was either de|)uty (sagan) of the higli priest 
(Lightfoot, Temple Service, y. 1) or president (k'C'j) 
of tiie Sanhedrm (Baronius, Annals, followed by 
Selden, de Success. Pont if. i. 12) or chief examining 
judge, l*^ n'3 2N (Ewald, JLI. vol. vi. p. 4.30). 

The interview of Jesus with Annas is described 

Jn 18'*'". It could have only one issue. Jesus 
was sent as a condemned prisoner for a more 
fonaal trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, as 
described by the Synoptists, but merely implied by 
St. John. (This is obscured in the Received text 
of v.**, and still more in the AV, which renders 
the aorist as a pluperfect ; ol>v is read by B C* L X 
1. 33.) We have seen that the Sanhedrin at thlH 
time met in the headquarters of the Annas faction, 
so that it may have been when passing tlirough 
the court from the apartments of Annas to the 
council chamber that ' the Lord turned, and lookeil 
upon Peter,' Lk 22«i (Westcott on Jn IS^). 2. 

1 Es 9=»S see Harim. N. J. D. White. 

ANNIS {'Avvels B, 'Avvids A, AV Ananias, RVni 
Annias).— The eponym of a family tliat returned 
with Zerubbabel (1 Es 5'*). Omitted in parallel 
passages of Ezr and Neh. J. A. Selbie. 

ANNUS (A 'Avcous, B 'Apfioiid, AV Anas).— A 
Levite, 1 Es 9« = Neh 8^ [Bani]. 

ANNUUS (A 'Avpowos, B omits), 1 Es 8« (47,. 
LXX). — The name does not occur in Ezr 8" ; it 
may be due to reading inxi (AV 'and with him)' 
there as um. Ii. St. J. Thackeray, 

ANOINTING.— 1. The application of unguents tO' 
the skin and hair as an act of the toilet is an 
ancient custom ; the oldest prescription extant is 
for this purpose, and professes to date from about 
B.C. 4200. Among the Jews a. was a daily practice 
(Mt 6"), the oil being applied to exposed parts (Ps 
104'^), soothing the skm burnt by the sun. The 
eflects of oil are more enduring than those of 
water, hence a. was practised after bathing (Ru 
3*, Ezk 1(P). It was a mark of luxury to use 
specially scented oils (Am 6"), such as those 
Hezekiah kept in his treasure-house (2 K 20'^). As 
a. was a sign of joy (Pr 27^), it was discontinued 
during the time of mourning (Dn 10^) ; so Joab 
instructed the woman of Tekoa to appear un- 
anointed before David (2 S 14-). On the death of 
Bathsheba's child, David anointed himself to show 
that his mourning had ended (2 S 12^). The cessa- 
tion of a. Avas to be a mark of God's displeasure if 
Israel proved rebellious (Dt 28''", Mic 6"*), and the 
restoration of the custom was to be a sign of God's 
returning favour (Is 61*). Anointing is used as a 
symbol of prosperity in Ps 92'*, Ec Jr. 

2. Before paying visits of ceremony the head was 
anointed ; so Naomi bade Ruth anoint herself before 
visiting Boaz (3*). Oil of myrrh was used for this 
purpose in the harem of Ahasuerus (Est 2'^). On 
monuments in Egypt the host is seen anointing liis 
guest on his arrival ; and the same must have been 
customary in Pal., as Simons failure of hospitalit}' 
in this respect is commented upon by our Lord 
(Lk 7''^). This custom is referred to in Ps 23*. 
The Isr. showed their goodwill to the captives of 
Judah by anointing them before sending them 
back at the command of Oded (2 Ch 28"). Mary's 
anointing of our Lord was according to this custom. 

3. Before battle, shields were oiled, that their 
surfaces might be slippery and shining (Is 21", 

2 S P' RV). This practice is referred to several 
times by classical authors, and is in use to this 
day among some African tribes. 

i. As a remedial agent a. was in use among the 
Jews in pre-Cliristian times ; it was practised by 
the apostles (Mk 6'*), recommended by St. James 
(5'*), mentioned in the parable of the Gootl 
Samaritan (Lk 10**), and used as a type of God's 
forgiving grace healing the sin-sick soul (Is 1', 
Ezk le"-*, Rev 3"*). In post-apost. times the oil was 
supposed to owe its virtue to its consecration by 
prayer, which might be done by any Christian ; thus 




Proculus anoint«d Severus, and healed him (Tertull. 
ad Scap. iv.). By the 3rd cent, consecration of the 
oil could only l>e done bv the bishop (Innocent, 
Decentio, >'iii.); although any Christian might 
apply the holy oil, and the oil from the church 
lamps was often taken for this purpose (Chrysostom 
in Alt 32). Oil was also consecrated by being 
taken from the tombs of martyrs {ib. Homil. in 
Martyr, iii. ). By the 5th cent, the priest alone could 
anoint (Labbe & Cossart, Concilia, i.\. 419, § 10). 
This a. M-as intended as a means of cure even as 
late as the days of Bede (in Marci, i. c. 24). The a. 
of the dying was a heretical practice of the Mar- 
cosians (Irenaeus, i. 21. 5) and the Heracleonites 
(Epiphanius, adv. Hcer. xxxvi. 2) for purposes of 
exorcism. Theodoret says that the Archontici 
also use oU and water, but apparently in a different 
way (eirijSoXXoim, see Hcer. Fab. Compend. i. II). 
In the Rom. Church by the 12th cent, the idea of 
healing had become obsolete, and the a. was 
restricted to the dying (Council of Florence, 1439) 
and applied before the Viaticum (1st Council of 
Mainz, Can. xxvi. ). It is called extreme unction by 
Hugo de St. Y\c\.oxQ{Summa Sententiar. vL 15), and 
its place as one of the seven sacraments of the 
Kom. Church was decided by the Coxmcil of Trent. 
Cah-in calls it histrianica hypocrisis {Inst. vL 19, 

The ceremonial of anointing the leper when 
cleansed was not remedial, but a sign of reconsecra- 
tion. In Scripture the application of any soft 
material, as moistened clay, to a blind man's eyes, 
is called anointing ( Jn 9*). 

5. As in Egypt, the application of ointments and 
spices to the dead bodv was customary in PaL 
(Mk 161, lij 23^6, Jn l9») ; but they were only 
externally applied, and did not prevent decomposi- 
tion (.Jn 11*'). In later times the a. of the dead 
with holy oil is recommended (Dionys. Areopag. 
dt Ecchs. Hicrarch. vii. § 8). 

6. Holy things were by a. dedicated to God even 
in ancient times. Thus Jacob consecrated the 
stones at Bethel (Gn 28", 35") ; and God recog- 
nised the action (31^^). In Greece, Egypt, and 
other countries dedication by oil was practised, and 
is continued in the Rom. and Gr. rituals for the 
consecration of churches. The tabernacle and 
its furniture were thus consecrated (Ex 30^ 40"*, 
Lv 8"), and the altar of burnt-offering was re- 
consecrated after the sin-offering (Ex 29^*). Some 
periodic hostia honoraria were anointed with oil 
(Lv 2^ etc.) ; but no oil was to be poured on the 
sin-offering (Lv 5", Nu 5^^). It is not said that 
tlie temple was consecrated by a., but there 
was holy oU m the priests' charge at the time 
(1 K 1^), as there was in the days of the second 
temple (1 Ch 9^). 

7. Priests were set apart by a. In the case of 
Aaron, and probably all high priests, this was done 
t^vice : first by pouring the holy oil on his head after 
his robing, but before the sacrifice of consecration 
(Lv 8l^ Ps 133-) ; and next by sprinkling after the 
sacrifice (Lv 8*^). The ordinary priests were only 
sprinkled with oil after the application of thebloo<i 
of the sacrifice. Hence the nigh priest is called 
the anointed priest (Lv 4^- ® and 6^). The holy 
oil for this purpose was made of olive oil, cinnamon, 
cassia, flowing mjTrh, and the root of the sweet 
cane (Acorns Calamus). It was to be used only 
for these ceremonials, and its unauthorised com- 
pounding was strictly forbidden (Ex 30"^). In Egypt 
tiiere were nine sacred oils for ceremonial use. 
A. in the ordination of presbyters and deacons 
came into use in the 8th cent., but was not 
practised in the early Church. 

8. Of designation to kingship by a. we have 
examples in Saul (1 S lO^) and David (1 S 16"). 
This act was accompanied by the gift of the Spirit ; 

so, when David was anointed, the Spirit descended 
on him, and departed from Saul ; and Hazael was 
anointed over Syria by God's command (1 K 19"). 
Kings thus designated were called the Lord's 
anointed. David thus speaks of Saul (1 S26") and 
of himself (Ps 2"-). This passage is used by the 
apostles as prophetic of Christ (Ac 4*). 

9. By a. Kings were installed in o£Sce. David 
was again anointed when made king of Judah, and 
a third time when made king ot united Israel 
(2 S 2* 5'). Solomon was anointed in David's life- 
time, and he refers to the a. in his dedication 
prayer. It is not said that those who succeeded by 
right of primogeniture were anointed ; but when 
the succession was disputed, Jehoiada anointed 
Joash (2 K 11^). Jehoahaz the younger son of 
Josiah was anointed (2 K 23**) in place of his elder 
brother Jehoiakim (see 23*^**). Kings of other 
lands were anointed. This was early known to 
the Israelites, as we learn from Jotham's parable 
(^g 9®). The kings of Egypt were anointed, and 
the a. is said to have been done by the gods 
(Diimichen, Hist. Inschrift, L 12) ; hence they are 
called the 'anointed of the gods.' The king of 
Tyre is also called the ' anointed ' (Ezk 28"). Jehu 
was anointed as beginning a new dynasty (2 K 9^). 
Zedekiah is referred to as anointed (La 4*). British 
kings were anointed in pre-Saxon days (Gildas, 
de excidio Brit. i. 19), as were the Cliristianised 
Saxons ; but the first mention of a. at coronation 
elsewhere in Europe is in A.D. 633 in the Acts 
of the 6th Council of Toledo. Charlemagne, 
A.D. 800, was the first emperor anointed (by Pope 
Leo in.). A. is now a part of the ceremonial of 
coronation in most Christian kingdoms. 

10. A. is used metaphorically to mean setting 
apart to the prophetic office ; so Elijah is told to 
anoint Elisha. This does not appear to have been 
literally done (1 K 19^6). In Ps 105^ the words 
anointed and proph^As are used as synonyms. The 
Servant of the Lord calls himself anointed to preach 
(Is 6P), and Christ teUs the people of Nazareth 
that this prophecy is fulfilled in Hun (Lk 4^). 

11. Sinularly in a metaphorical sense any one 
chosen of God is called an anointed one ; thus the 

fatriarchs are called God's Messiahs (Ps 105'^), and 
srael as a nation (Ps 84», Hab 3", Ps 89=«- «), 
being promised deliverance on this account (Is 
102-", 1 S 21"). Cyrus is also called a Messiah 
(Is 45*). The name Christ is the Gr. equivalent 
of the Heb. 3fes«fiA = ' anointed.' The anointing 
of Ps 45" is taken in He 1* as prophetic of the 
Saviour's anointing. 

In this sense, as a chosen people, believers are 
said to be God's anointed (2 Co 1*, 1 Jn 2*- ^'), the 
unction being the gift of the Holy Spirit. Inpost- 
apost. times these words gave rise to the practice 
of anointing with oil at baptism. This was done 
by wav of exorcism before the washing in the E. 
ChurcL in the days of Cyril (Catech. Mystag. iL D), 
as it seems from St. Augustine to have been the 
practice in Africa (see Tr. 44 in Joannis, § 2, refer- 
ring to anointing the blind man's eyes before the 
washing). ButTertullian J^uts the a. after the wash- 
ing (De resurr. Camis, § viiL ), as does Optatns, who 
says that Christ was anointed by the dove after 
baptism (de Schism. Donat. iv. 76). Upon these 
texts, (quoted above, coupled with the 'sealing' men- 
tioned in Eph 1" 4** and 2 Co 1^, the post-apostolic 
Church based the ceremony of confirmation, in 
connexion with which in the W. Church another 
anointing became customary in the 5th cent. 

LrrKRAtrRK. — Besides the references given above, eee for 
fuller details concerning the above sections — 1. Papjfrut Eben, 
p. 66 ; Erman, ^ypten, 1SS5, p. 316. 4. Martene, de AnL EeeL 
Rit., Rouen, 1700, L 7; DaUsus, de duobus, LeMnonan Saera- 
mentis, Geneva, 1659; Decretttm Eugenii'JF. de Sept. EctL 
Saeram., Lou vain, 1557. 6. Amobius, ado. Gent. L 319; Fabri- 
das, de Tempi. Christ., Hebnstadt, 17(W ; Paosanias, viL 22. 




7. TheoduKus, Epise. Aurel. Capit. de Pretb., ed. Mi^e, 193 ; 
Ivo Carnotensis, JDeeret. vi. 121. A. MACALISTER. 

ANON, a contraction for ' in one,' is used in AV 
for ' in one moment ' (RV ' 8trai<,'htway '). Mt IS-"" 
' a. with joy receiveth it' ; Mk 1*" 'a. they t<ill liim 
of her'; Jth 13" 'a. after she went forth' (KV 
'after a little while she went forth '). 

J. Hastings. 

ANOS {'Avoji), 1 Es 9**.— One of the descendants of 
liaani, who agreed to put away his 'strange' wife : 
corresponding to Vuniah (Tyl), Ezr lO'". 

ANOTHER. — A. is 'one other,' but sometimes 
the idea is ' a different one,' of which there is a fine 
instance in Gal 1^ ' I marvel that ye are so soon 
removed from him that called you into the^ace of 
Christ unto a. gospel' (Gr. irtpov, ItV 'a ditierent 
gospel,' but V.'' 'which is not a.' Gr. SXko; cf. 
2 Co 1 P). In 2 Ch 20^ ' every one helped to destroy 
a.' ; mod. Eng. would say 'the other'; so RV in 
Gn 15'", Ex 21'8 37" etc., but not in Zee 11". 

J, Hastings. 

ANSWER. — 1. As a subst. a. is used in the sense 
of apology or defence (Gr. 6.iro\ofla) in 1 Co 9^ ' mine 
a. (RV 'my defence') to them that do examine 
me'; 2 Ti 4»« 'At my first a. (RV 'defence') no 
man stood by me ' ; 1 P 3^' ' Ready always to give 
an a. (RV 'give a.') to every man.' Compare the 
use of a. as a verb in Ac 24'" 'I do tlie more 
cheerfully a. for myself (RV 'I do cheerfully 
make my defence'), Ac 25»-''' 26'- 2, Lk 12'' 21". 
2. In Ro 1 1^ ' what saith the a. of God unto him ? ' 
a. means oracle or divine response (Gr. xPVf^- 
Tifffjidi, the only occurrence of the word in NT, 
but it is found m 2 Mac 2* xPVf^'''^<^f^o^ yevy^divro^, 
' being warned of God ' AV and RV ; see Sanday 
and Headlam, Romans, pj). 173, 313). 3. In 1 P 3-' 
' the a. of a good conscience toward God,' a. is 
prob. intended to mean defence, as above ; but 
the Gr. is not d7roXo7^a but eVepun-T/yua, and in what 
precise sense the apostle uses that word is dis- 
puted ; RV gives 'interrogation,' with two alterna- 
tives in the marg. 'inquiry' and 'appeal.' See 
Thayer, N. T. Lex. s.v. 4. As a verb a. is often used 
when no question has been asked. The most strik- 
ing instance is Ac 5^ where St. Peter 'answers' 
Sapphira, not only before she had opened her 
mouth, but by asking her a question. 5. In Gal 
4'J5 < Yor this Agar is Mt. Sinai in Arabia, and 
a***" to Jeru.s.,' a**^** to = corresponds with (Gr. 
(Ti'vcTToixft — lit. ' belongs to the same row or column 
with'). Answerable occurs in AV only Ex 38'* 
•a. to the hangings of the court,' i.e. 'correspond- 
ing to ' ; but RV adds Ezk 40'8 ' a. unto (AV ' over 
against') the length of the gates,' 45^ 4gi3. i8j/i» 
Cf Runyan, Holy War (Clar. Press ed. p. 92), 
' This famous town of Mansonl had five Gates, in 
at which to come, out at which to go ; and these 
were made likewise answerable to the Walls.' 

J. Hastings. 

ANT (n^9j nSmM/ih, a»Vm'?{. formlra). The ant 
is mentioned only twice in the Bible. Once (Pr 
0") with reference to the industry of this insect, 
and again (Pr 30"*) with reference to its wisdom 
and foresight. There has never been any dispute as 
to the industry of the ant. Sir John Lubbock 
(Anti, Bees, and Wa.yis, p. 27) says, 'They work 
all day, and in warm weatlier, if need be, at night 
too. I once Matched an ant from six in the morn- 
ing, and she worked without intermission till a 
quarter to ten at night. I had put her to a saucer 
containing larva', and in this time she had carried 
off no less than 187 to their nests. I had another 
ant, which I employed in my experiments under 
continuous observation several days. When I 
started for London in the morning, and again 
when I went to Ixnl ;it ni^Iit. T used to put licr 

into a small bottle, but the moment she was let 
out she began to work again. On one occasion I 
was away from home for a week. On my return I 
took her out of the bottle, placing her on a little heap 
of larva% al)out three feet from her nest. Under 
these circumstances I certainly did not expect her 
to return. However, thou;'h she had been six 
days in confinement, the orave little creature 
immediately picked up a larva, carried it to her 
nest, and after half an hour's rest returned for 

With reference to the wistlom and foresight of 
the ant there has been much discussion. Although 
not expressly stated that the ' meat ' which the ant 
' pi'epares ' in the summer is for winter use, it is 
generally agreed that such is the meaning of the 
passage. Ihe Greeks, Romans, Arabian natural- 
ists, and Jewish rabbis confirm this opinion. Yet 
many naturalists and commentators have disputed 
this fact, and say that the writer adopted a 
popular error, and that the ant does not store the 
seeds which it takes in such quantities to its nest 
as food, but only as a lining to its burrows, or for 
some other unknown reason. They argue from 
two considerations— (1) that the ant is carnivorous, 
and has no use for the seeds which it accumulates 
in its nest ; (2) that the ant hybernates, and there- 
fore does not need food in winter. Both of these 
propositions are partially true and partially false. 
All ants eat flesh greedily, but they are all passion- 
ately fond of many things besides. Sir John Lub- 
bock has shown that ants derive a very important 
part of their sustenance from the sweet juice 
secreted by aphides, a product hardly to be called 
animal food more than honey. In the words of 
Linnaeus, 'the aphis is the cow of ants.' Other 
kinds of insects are utilised in the same manner. 
Many ants keep flocks and herds of aphides. The 
aphides retain the secretion until tiie ants are 
ready to receive it, and the ants stroke and caress 
them with their antennoR, until they emit the 
sweet excretion. The ants collect the egfjs and 
larvaj of these aphides, store them with their own 
during the long winter sleep, that they may be 
hatched in the spring, and supply them a^ain with 
their favourite food. Here then, says Lubl>ock, 
'our ants may not perhaps lay up food for the 
winter, but they do more, for they keep during 
six months the eggs which will enable them to 
procure food during the following summer — a case 
of i^udence unexampled in the animal kingdom.' 
But it is also true that ants eat many articles of 
purely vegetable food. Those of Palestine and 
Syria certainly eat all kinds of cake, sweetmeats, 
more or less fruit, bread, meal, and seeds. In the 
neighbourhood of every tlireshing-floorand granary, 
and of stables, there are always immense numbers 
of ants, which abstract surprising quantities of 
grain, and store them in their nests. They often 
carry the grains many feet or yards away, along 
well-beaten roads, which cross each other in every 
direction from the heaps of giain. Similar facts have 
been observed in the warmer parts of Europe and 
in India. The Mishna lays down rules in rejrard 
to the ownership of grain so stored. ^laimonides 
has discussed the question as to whether it belongs 
to the owners of the land or to gleaners, deciding 
in favour of the latter. The ants, hq,wever, difier 
from him, and are of opinion that the store belongs 
to themselves. I am assured by native peasants, 
well qualified to know, that the ants eat the grain 
during the season of non-production. After the 
first rains, the ants bring out their larva? and the 
stored grains to he sunned. Indian ants do the 
same. Many of these grains are more or less 
gnawed, or the edible parts entirely consumed. 
It was the opinion of Aldrovandus and others of 
the ancients, cnnliriiu'd by the French Academy 




(Aiidi- 'i'tn, 15G, 157) and of N. Pluche 

(X- 1 til I- 12S1, that the ants systematically 

bit oft' the iiiaii of the grain to prevent its germina- 
tion. I think it unnecessary to ascribe to the ants 
so much intelligence as -nrould be implied in this 
extraordinary measure, but it is no way improb- 
able that the head would be the first part attacked, 
as it is the softest portion of the grain, and the 
most accessible, being uncovered by the silicious 
envelope, a^ well as the sweetest morsel of the 
whole. Lublnxk tells us of a Texan ant that 
clears disks, 10 or 12 feet in diameter, round the 
entrance to its nest, to allow certain grains known 
as ant-rice, and no others, to grow there. 

Thus the ants ' are exceeding wise.' Many of 
theii- nests also are marvels of construction, some 
composed of galleries and chambers tmdergroimd, 
some built in the form of moimds or huts above 
the surface. Tlie-e are grouped in towns, con- 
nected by surface roads, sometimes arched over 
at places, and by underground tunnels. No less 
than 584 species of insects are found in association 
with aiir-. serving them in various ways, some 
obvioi;- not clear. But that they are 

toleratt mts for reasons kno^\Ti to them- 

selves is ;^lio\vu by the fact that ants avHI imme- 
diately attack and drive out or kill any living 
creatures which they do not like. Many of the 
insects furnish some form of food, as in the case 
of the aphides. Others rid the ants of parasites. 
Others suein to Ije congenial to them for reasons 
yet to l>e studied. 

In addition to these insects, not of their own 
family, ants make slaves of other ants. This is 
not done by the capture of adult prisoners, but by 
raids organised for the purpose of stealing the 
eggs, larvje, and pupae from the nests of other 
species. These infant captives are taken to the 
nests of their abductors, and raised as slaves. 
These slaves do all or most of the domestic work 
of their masters, who reserve themselves for the 
noble art of ^\"ar. 

Ants also have accurate methods of division of 
labour. To the younger ones are assigned some of 
the lighter tasks, while the older ones engage in 
the more serious and laborious work. In some 
cases individuals are appointed to collect honey 
and store it in large sacs in their bodies, to oe 
distributed to their idle masters, Avho do not 
trouble themselves to leave their nests. 

Lubbock thus sums up the evidence that ants 
' are exceeding wise ' : ' The anthropoid apes no 
doubt approach nearer to man in bodUy structure 
than do other animals, but when we consider the 
habits of ants, their social organisation, their large 
communities and elaborate habitations, their road- 
ways, their possession of domestic animals, and 
even, in some cases, of slaves, it must be admitted 
that they have a fair claim to rank next to man in 
the scale of intelligence.' G. E. Post. 


ANTHOTHIJAH (-,7!h;i-, AV Antothijah).— A 

man of Benjamin (1 Ch 8-^). See Genealogy. 


ANTICHRIST. — See Max of Six. ANTILI- 
BANUS.-See Ledaxox. 

ANTIOCH [Ai'Tioxeia]. — In Syria, under the 
Seleucids, there appear to have been at least five 
places which at one time or another enjoyed this 
title : Hippos on the hills above the E. shore of the 
Lake of Galilee i"A. ij irpbi 'Wirci)), Gadara (cf. 
Stephanus. De Urhibiis : Reland, Pal. 77-4), (Jerasa 
in E. Gilea<l I'A. ^ irpor -uj Xpv<rop6(}), all of them in 

the Decapolis, and perhaps also Acco or Ptolemab 
(Head, Hist. Num. 677); but tke Antioch in 
Syria was A. on the Orontes, distinguished as 
'A. 17 rp6i, or art, Ad<ppij, and entitled fnfrp&woKu 
(ib. 656). 

Under an Eastern people like the Arabs, the 
natural capital of Syria is Damascus, on the borders 
of the Arabian desert. But when the Greeks poured 
into the land after Alexander, it was inevitable 
that they should establish the centre of their govern- 
ment nearer the Mediterranean and Asia Minor. 
Accordingly, when the Seleucid Empire was 
founded, Seleucus Nikator (Jos. c. Apion, iL 4) 
selected a site 120 stadia from the sea (Strabo, 
xvi.), where the Orontes, now El-'Asi, and the 
great roads from the Euphrates and Ccele-Syria 
break the long Syrian range and debouch upon the 
coast. The projected Euphrates-Levant railway is 
to pass by the same way. The valley is tolerably 
wide, ani both fair and fertile. The city was 
built partly on an island in the river, but mostly 
on the N. bank of the latter, and up the slopes of 
Mt. Silpius. By the time of Antiochus Epiphanes 
(175 B.C.) it consisted of four quarters {rerpdroXii, 
Strabo), divided by the long columned street 
which was a feature of every Greek city in Syria, 
and by a second which cut this obliquely. Temples 
and other large public buildings were erected from 
time to time by the Seleucids and their Roman 
successors. Daphne was a neighbouring grove 
sacred to ApoUo (Jos. Ant. xvii. ii. 1 ; Plmy, HN 
V. 18; 2 Mac 4**). Lender the Seleucids the city 
developed a mixed populace, essentially fickle and 
turbulent, who frequently rose against their mlers. 
There were Jews in Antioch from the time of its 
foundation, for Seleucus Nikator gave them the 
rights of citizenship (Jos. Ant. Xll. iiL 1). Many 
others must have fled or been carried captive to A. 
during the Maccabsean period (ib. XII. XUI. passim). 
The Antiochenes expelled Alexander Balas, and 
offered the crown to Ptolemy PhUometor, who, 
however, persuaded them to receive Demetrius 
Nikator [ib. xiil. iv. 7 ; but cf. 1 Mac 11"*-). They 
besieged the latter in his palace ; but with the 
help of Jonathan Maccabaeus and 3000 Jews he 
regained the city, yet soon after was obliged to 
yield it to Alexander's son Antiochus and his 
general Tiyphon Ant. XIII. v. 3 ; 1 Mac ll**-). 
Under the Seleucids A. remained till B.C. 83, when 
it was taken by Tigranes of Armenia. When 
Pompey overthrew the latter, he made A. a free 
city, and it became the seat of the Prefect, and 
capital of the Rom. province of Syria. M. Antonins 
ordered the citizens to release all the Jews whom 
they had enslaved, and restore to them their pos- 
sessions {Anf. XIV. xii. 6). When Pompey fell, A. 
sided with Ctesar. and after Actium with Augustus. 
Both of the latter, as well as Herod the Great 
(Ant. XVI. V. 3) and Tiberius, embellished the town 
with theatres, baths, and streets. The harbour 
of A. was Seleucia. The population was very 
vigorous. They revolted several times against 
Rome ; and after the disastrous earthquakes of 
A.D. 37 and subsequent years they quickly restored 
the town. Art and literature were cultivated so 
as to draw the praise of Cicero ; but with the 
energy and brilliance of this people there was 
ever mixed a notorious insolence and scurrility. 
A large number of Romans settled in A., and 
the Jewish community speedUy grew in numbers 
and in influence with the rest of the inhabitants 
(Jos. B.J II. x\-iii. 5), who protected them in the 
first Jewish revolt against Rome, but aftemards 
displaved a bitter hate against them (ib. Vll. 
V. 2). ■ 

It was when A. was filled with these rich and 
varied elements of life — Josephus calls her the 
third city of the Empire, next to Rome and Alex- 




andria (BJ ill. ii, 4)— that she entered the history 
of Christiauity. Antiochean Jews and proselyte 
Greeks must have come under the influence of the 
apostles' ministry in Jerus, Nicolas * a proselyte 
oi A.' was one of tne seven deacons (Ac6'). Upon the 
persecution that arose about Stephen, the disciples 
were scattered as far north as A. (Ac ll^'"'-), and 
amon<; them some men of Cyprus and Cyrene, 
who began to preach to Greeks (many ancient 
authorities give ' Grecian Jews,' but surely Greeks 
are meant, — for otherwise the distinction made 
})etween the Cypriotes and C^'renians and the 
other preachers in 11** is meaningless). To them 
at A. the Church at Jerus. sent Uarnabas, who, 
after seeing the situation, went and fetched Paul 
thither from Tarsus. For a year they worked to- 
gether in the church, teaching ; ' and the disciples 
were called Christians first in A.' The wit 
of the place was always famous for giving 
names. Prophets arrived irom Jerus. predicting a 
famine ; and when this came to pass, the Church of 
A. proved once more the vigour of the population 
from which it was drawn, by sending supplies 
to Jerus. by the hands of liamabas and Saul 
{ib. 27-30J These returned to A., and after their 
ministry ' in the church ' they were sent forth by 
the ^rt of Seleucia to Cyprus on Paul's first great 
missionaiy journey (13^) ; and from this to A. they 
returned, with their report of faith among the 
Gentiles (14*"). When Jews came down to teach 
the necessity of circumcision for the latter, the 
Church at A. sent Barnabas and Paul to Jerus. to 
claim for them freedom from the law (\5^^-) ; and 
a deputation from Jerus. returned with the two 
ambassadors (15'^-^-). After ministering for a time 
in A., Paul and Barnabas set forth on their 
second journey by the Cilician gates (Ramsay) to 
Lystra (153«) ; Paul returned (18^^) ; and A. was the 
starting-point of his third journey (ib.^), which 
also was taken into Asia Minor, by the Syrian and 
Cilician gates, one great line of the advance- 
ment of Christianity westward. A. was not only 
the first Gentile Church, but may be called the 
mother of all the rest. This pre-eminence she con- 
tinued to enjoy ; for it Avas probably her missionary' 
originality, rather than the tradition which made 
Peter her bishop for two years (cf. Gal 2"), 
that gave her Patriarch precedence of those of 
Kome, Constantinople, Jerus., and Alexandria. 
A. was the birtliplace of Ammianus Marcellinus, 
John Chrysostom, and Evagrius. As long as she 
remained part of an empire with its centre in 
Europe, A. continued the virtual capital of Syria. 
When the Arabs came, she, the city of the Levant, 
yielded to the city of the Desert; and though 
with the Crusaders she became once more the pivot 
of the West in its bearing on Svria, and the centre 
of the Princinality of A. (from'Taurus to Nahr-el- 
Kebir), she tell away again when they left, and 
gave up to Damascus even her Christian Patriarch 
Now Antaki (Turkish), or Antakiyeh (Arab.), she 
is a meagre town of GOOO inhabitants. Besides the 
ruins of Justinian's wall there are no ancient 
remains of importance. 

LiTraATCKB.— (Besides the ancient authorities already cited), 
Reland. PalaHina, 119 fl., where Jerome's error, that A. was 
Hamath (Comm. on Amos 6), or Ribloh (Comm. on E»k. 47) 
18 stetc<lat.d opposed ;C. O. Mullcr, AntiquUatet Antiochenii 
(Gottingfn 18J9); Noris, Anniu et Epocho! Syromaeedonum; 
UibDon and Mommsen, pantim; Schiirer, UJP I i 437 n 
r**??"* W^i'1°^* lives of St. Paul, esp. Conybeare and Howson's '• 
Lewln, FMtx Smtx, patrim ; Ramsay, Church in the Rom. Emv 
cha. u.-vii., xvi. On A. under the Moslems, see the extracts 
from Arab, geogniphcrs in Guy Le Strange, Paletline under the 
JtfMfenw, esp. 367-3/7. On the A. of the Crusaders. Rev, 
C^>l<mtet Franquet de Syne arix 12jn« et ISme siicUt; cf 
RlsoBenJomm of Tudela's Travel*, a.d. 1103, and Bertrandere 
de la Bro«iuifere'8 in 1432 ; and on the modem city, see 
Chesney, J?upAra(« Expedition; and Oeorse Smith, Assyrian 

^'«"^"- G. A. Smith. 

ANTIOCH IN PISIDIA {'AvTioxfta HtirtSia, more 
correctly rendered ' Pisidian Antioch ') is defined 
by Strabo (pp. 569, 557, 677) as a city of 
Phrygia towards or near Pisidia. It was prob- 
ably one of the sixteen Antiochs founded by 
Seleucus Nikator (301-280 ; Appian, St/r. 57), and 
named after his father. The inhabitants claimed 
to be colonists from Magnesia on the Marauder ; 
but traditions claiming Greek origin for Phrygian 
cities were fashionable and untrustworthy. In 
190 B.C. it was declared free by the Romans ; and 
its history is unknown until in 39 B.C. it was made 
by Antony part of the kingdom of Amyntas (as 
we learn from Appian, Civ. v. 75, cf. Strabo, p. 
569) ; on whose death in 25 it pa.ssed into Rom. 
hands as part of the province G.\latia. At 
some time earlier than 6 B.C. (OIL iii. 6974) 
Augustus made it a colonia with Latin rights 
(Digest, 50. 15. 8, 10) with the name Casareia 
Antiocheia, the administrative centre of the 
southern half of the province, and the military 
centre of a series of colonicB (Lystra, Parlais, 
Cremna, Copiama, Olbasa) foundecl to defend the 
province against the unruly and dangerous Pisidi- 
ans in the fastnesses of the Taurus mountains. 
The region or district to Avliich Antioch belonged 
is called Phrygia by Strabo (and also in Ac 16' 
18^, according to the South-Galatian theory, held 
by some scholars, disputed by others), Pisidian 
Phrygia by Ptolemy v., 5. 4, Pisidia by Ptolemy v., 
4. 11, and by later authorities, showing that 
gradually that part of Phrygia, which was included 
in the province Galatia and separated from the 
great mass of Phrygia (wliich was part of the 
province Asia), was merged in Pisidia. Thus the 
name Antioch towards Pisidia (Strabo, A.D. 19), or 
Pisidian Antioch (to distinguish it from Antioch 
on the Maeander or Carian Antioch), gave place to 
the name Antioch of Pisidia (Ptolemy v., 4. 11, and 
some MSS. of Ac 13"). The influence of the 
preaching of Paul and Barnabas in Antioch radi- 
ated overthe whole region connected politically with 
the city (Ac 13**). Antioch (as Arundel discovered) 
is situated about 2 miles E. from Yalowatch 
on the skirts of the long ridge called Sultan-Dagh, 
in a strong situation, about 3600 ft. above sea- 
level, overlooking a large and fertile plain, which 
stretches away S.E. to the Limnai (Egerdir 
Lake), and is drained by the river Anthios. The 
ruins, which are impressive and of great extent, 
have never as yet been carefully examined. An- 
tioch was a great seat of the worship of Men 
AskaSnos ; but the large estates and numerous 
temple-slaves ruled by the priests were confiscated 
by the Romans. Jewish colonists were always 
favoured by the Seleucid kings, who found them 
good and trusty supporters ; many thousands of 
Jews were settled in the cities of Phrygia (Jos. 
Ant. XII. iii. f.; Cicero, pro Flacco, 28. 66-8); 
and a synagogue at Antioch is mentioned Ac 13". 
The inlmence ascribed to the ladies of Antioch (Ac 
13***) is characteristic of Phrygia and Asia Minor 
generally, where women enjoyed great considera- 
tion, and often held ofiice in the cities (see Paris, 
Quatemis femina: res puhUcas attlgcrint, 1891). 

LrrERATURE. — Antioch is descr)be<l by Arundel, Diteoveries in 
As. Min. i. 281 f., and by Hamilton, Researches in As. Min. i. 
472 f. ; see also Ramsay, Church in Rom. Einp. ]>p. 25-3.'i, St. 
Paul, pp. 99-107 : inadet^uate articles in Pauly-Wissowa, Enef/- 
clop., and other geographical dictionaries : many inscriptions m 
Starrelt, Epigra})hic Journey in As. Min. r>. 121 flf., Ho{fe Ex- 
pedition in As. Min. p. 218 ff. : Ritter, Erdknnde ran Asien, 
xxi. p. 463, collects all the earlier accounts of travellers. See 
the article on Galatia. W. M. RaMSAY. 

ANTIOCHIANS ('Apnoxeh, 2 Mac 4»'9). — The 
efTorts of Antiochus Epiphanes to spread Gr. 
culture and Gr. customs throughout his dominions 
were diligently furthered by a section of the Jews. 



The leader of this Hellenizing party, Jason, brother 
of the high priest Onias lii., offered a large sum 
of money to Antiochus to induce the kin" to 
transfer the hio;h priesthood to himself, and along 
with certain other favours to allow the inhabitants 
of Jerusalem ' to be enrolled as Antiochians,' that 
is, to grant them the titles and privileges of 
citizens of Antioch. What was the precise nature 
of the desired pri\-ileges we do not know. Antiochus 
acceded to the proposal of Jason, and shortly after- 
wards a party of 'Antiochians' from Jerusalem 
was sent by him as a sacred deputation, to convey 
a contribution of money for the festival of Heracles 
at Tyre. H. A. White. 

ANTIOCHIS CArnoxh, 2 Mac 4»), a concubine 
of Antiochus Epiphanes, who, in accordance with 
an old Oriental custom, assigned to her for her 
maintenance the revenues of the two Cilician 
cities. Tarsus and Mallus. This grant gave rise 
to disturbances among the inhabitants of the two 
cities, but we are not told what means were taken 
by Antiochus to allay their discontent. 

H. A. White. 

ANTIOCHUS CArrioxot, 1 Mac 12i« 14- ; cf. Jos. 
A nt. xm. V. 8), the father of Numenius, who was 
one of the envoys sent (c. 144 B.C.) by Jonathan the 
Maccabee to renew the covenant made by Judas 
with the Romans, and to enter into friendly rela- 
tions with the Spartans. H. A. White. 

ANTIOCHUS I. CAjrrtoxoj, 'the opposer'), sur- 
named Soter, 'deliverer,' was bom B.C. 324, son of 
of Seleucus Nikator and of Apama, a princess of 
Soixdiana. He succeeded his lather (B.C. 280) on 
the throne of Syria, but during the nineteen years 
of his reign was concerned chiefly with the prose- 
cution of his claims to the throne of Macedonia, 
with the maintenance of his empire against Kelts 
and eastern revolts, and with the repression of 
the Gauls who had settled in Asia Minor. He was 
slain by one of the latter in battle (B.C. 261). The 
possession of Coele-Syria was a matter of dispute 
between him and Ptolemy Philadelphus ( 1st Syrian 
War), but it remained under the sovereignty of the 
latter, and the S. districts do not appear to have 
been invaded by Antiochus. K. W. Moss. 

ANTIOCHUS II. (sumamed Theos, 'a god') 
succeeded his father, A. I., as king of Syria in B.C. 
261. His kingdom was invaded soon after his 
accession by the generals of Ptolemy Philadelphus 
(2nd Syrian War), who occupied several of the 
principal towns on the coast of Asia Minor. Peace 
was concluded (B.C. 250), probably on condition 
that A. should put away his wife Laodice, marry 
Berenice, daughter of I^tolemy, and transfer the 
succession to her issue (Athen. ii. 45). In a short 
time either Laodice was recalled, or A. endeavoured 
to reconcile her; but, in mistrust or revenge for 
the insult passed upon her, she plotted a^inst A., 
caused him {B.C. 24(5) to be poisoned and Berenice's 
infant to be put to death, and secured the throne 
for her son Seleucus (App. Syr. 65; Justin, xxviL 1 ; 
Val. Max. ix. 14. 1). There are strong evidences 
that A. conferred upon several cities of Asia Minor 
a democratic constitution and the rights of auto- 
nomy. His surname was given him by the Miles- 
ians in gratitude for his victory over their tyrant 
Timarchus (App. Syr. 65). The Jews in these 
cities, and notably in Ephesns, shared in these 
rights of citizenship ; and this was the case, 
both in the arrangement of cities rebuilt during 
the Hellenic age, and in the reorganisation of 
older cities effected chiefly by A. n. See Arrian, 
i. 17. 10 and 18. 2; Jos. Ant. XII. iii. 2; Apion. ii. 
4 ; Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscript. Grcec. nn. 166. 
171. Dn 11* is traditionally interpreted of Anti- 

ochus (Jerome, ad Dan. 1 P), but the latter jtart of 
the rerse is almost hopelessly corrupt. 

K. W. Moss. 
ANTIOCHUS lU. ('the Great') was the son of 
Seleucus Kallinicus (B.C. 246-226), and succeeded 
to the throne of Syria on the death of his brother, 
Seleucus Keraunus (B.C. 223). Immediately after 
his accession he made war upon Egypt ; and in two 
successive campaigns he led his army as far as 
Dora, a few miles to the N. of Csesarea. A truce 
suspended hostilities for a time (Polyb. t. 60; 
Justin, XXX. 1, 2), during which he put down 
Molos rebellion in Media. In B.C. 218 he again 
drove the Egyp. forces southwards, and himself 
Avintered at Ptolemais ; but the next year he was 
completely defeated at Raphia (Polj'b. v. 51-87 ; 
Strabo, xvi. 759), near Gaza, and left Ptolemy 
PhUopator in undisputed possession of Ccele-Syria 
and Phoenicia. The following years he spent in 
warfare against Achaeus, whom he took in B.C. 
214, and in Parthia and Bactria, where his suc- 
cesses gained for him his surname. But on 
Ptolemy's death, in B.C. 204, he formed an alliance 
with Philip of Macedon for the partition of Egypt 
between the two powers (Liv. xxxi. 14). In JwasesL 
he found a party among the Jews alienated from 
Egypt, and with their help he extended his king- 
dom to the Sinaitic peninsula. But an invasion 
of his dominions by Attains, king of Pergamus, 
checked his further progress; and in his ateence 
Scopas, an Egyp. general, overran Jndsea, and 
recovered the lost territories. A. hastened to 
oppose him, and at Paneas {TLdpeiop, a grotto of 
Pan, which gave its name to the district), near the 
source of the Jordan, gained a decisive victory 
(B.C. 198), which made him again master of all 
Pal. (Polyb. xvi. 18, xxviii. 1 ; Liv. xxx. 19 ; Jos. 
Ant. xn. iii. 3). Judaea was thus finally connected 
with the Selencid dynasty. Syrian cTparifyoi, or 
military governors, were appomted ; and r^^olar 
taxes were imposed, and leased to contractors in 
the several to^vns. A. farther guaranteed the 
inviolability of the temple, and provided by ample 
grants for the performance of its services (Jos. 
Ant. xn. iiL 4). With a view to pacify Lydia and 
Phrygia, he sent there 2000 Jewish families 
from Mesopotamia with grants of land and im- 
munity from taxation. The intervention of the 
Romans prevented any further expedition against 
Egypt : and a treaty was made by which Ptolemy 
Epiphanes took in marriage A.'s daughter Cleo- 
patra, who was promised as her dower the three 
provinces of Ccele-Syria, Phoenicia, and Pal. (Polyb. 
xxviii. 17 ; App. Syr. 5 ; Liv. xxxv. 13 ; Jos. Ant. 
xn. iv. 1). The transfer of the provinces them- 
selves appears not to have taken place, though the 
queen for a time shared in their revenue. Judiea 
was probably occupied by Syrian and Egyp. garri- 
sons side bv side ; and the people were subjected 
to a twofold tyranny. A. retained the nominal 
sovereignty ; but in B.C. 196 he left Pal. in order to 
conduct an exijedition against Asia Minor (Liv. 
xxxiiL 19), and became involved in a long war with 
Rome. He was finally defeated in the battle of 
Magnesia (B.C. 190), and three years later was 
killed in an insurrection at Elymais. Dn lli*'* is 
traditionally interpreted of him, and he is men- 
tioned in 1 Mac V* 8*"*. The statements in the 
latter passage should be compared with App. Syr. 
36 and Liv. xxx\ii. 44, 56. R. W. Moss. 

trious ' ; also named erifuurfft, ' madman,' Polyb. 
xxvL 10 ; riKi)4>ipos, ' victorious,' and 0e6s, on coins 
and in Jos. Ant. xn. v. 5), second son of A. the 
Great, was for 14 years a hostage at Rome, and, 
after expelling Heliodoms, succeeded his own 
brother Seleucus Philopator in B.C. 175. His 



policy was to spread Greek culture (Tac. Hist. v. 8) 
through his dominions, and so knit the various 
peoples into a compact and single-purposed unity. 
Soon after his accession he was called upon to 
settle a dispute at Jerus. between the liigh priest 
Onias ill. and his brother Jason, the leader of the 
Hellenizing party. Onias was driven from Jerus. 
(2 Mac 4*"") ; and Jason secured the high priesthood 
by the payment to the king of a large sum of 
money ana the promise thoroughly to Hellenize 
the city (2 Mac 4»-i«, 1 Mac P"-"> ; Jos. Ant. xu. 
V. 1). A. soon after visited the city in person, and 
was received with every mark of honour (2 Mac 4"). 
In B.C. 171 Jason was himself supplanted by 
Menelaus, who offered larger bribes ; but the next 
year he was encouraged by a rumour of the kind's 
death in Egypt to besiege Jerus. (2 Mac 5'). The 
tidings reached A. as he was in the midst of his 
second prosperous campaign in Egj'pt, and at once, 
' in a furious mind,' ne marched against Jerus. 
The city was taken, many thousands of the people 
were massacred, and the temple was robbed of its 
treasures (I Mac 1^"", 2 Mac S^^" ; Jos. Ant. 
XII. v. 3; Apion. ii. 7). Philip, a Phrygian of 
specially barbarous temper (2 Mac 5'^-'), was left 
behind as governor of Jerus., and A. proceeded 
with tlio spoils of the temple to Antioch. 

In B.C. 168 A. set out on his last expedition 
against Egypt, and was approaching Alexandria to 
besiege it when he received from the Romans 
peremptory orders to refrain from making war 
upon the Ptolemies (App. Syr. 66 ; Liv. xlv. 12 ; 
Polyb. xxix. 11 ; Justin, xxxiv. 3) Reluctantly 
he witlidrew from Egypt, and vented his rage upon 
Jems, (see Dn 11^). Apollonius, one of the chief 
officers of revenue, was detached with an army of 
22,000 men, with instructions to exterminate the 
Jewish people and to colonise the city with Greeks 
(2 Mac 5**, 1 Mac I**- ^). Availing himself of the 
Sabbath law, Apollonius chose that day for entrance 
into Jerus., and met with no etiective resistance. 
The men were killed, except a few who took refuge 
witli Judas Maccabajus in flight, and the women 
and children sold into slavery. The city was set 
on fire, its walls thrown down, and their materials 
used to fortify anew the old city of David, which 
thenceforth uninterruptedly for 26 years Avas 
occupied by a Syrian garrison. Menelaus still 
remained hij'h priest, but it is difficult to under- 
stand what liis duties were, as the daily sacrifices 
are said to have ceased in the month of Sivan 

A decree was then promulgated by A. through- 
out his kingdom that in religion, law, and custom 
'all should be one people' (1 Mac \*^ ; Polyb. 
xxxviii. 18). In Juda?a alone the edict seems to 
have met with serious opposition. Accordingly 
the observance of the Saboath, circumcision, and 
abstinence from unclean food were specifically for- 
bidden under the penalty of death. Upon the 
altar of burnt-offering a smaller altar was built, 
and on the 2r)th of Chislev (Dec. 168) sacrifice was 
offered upon it to the Olympic Zeus (1 Mac 1*^, 
2 Mac 6'^; Jos. Ant. XII. v, 4: see Dn IP'. The 
phrase in Dn, Dcfe'P X^^?^V, may have other refer- 
ence, and is not without linguistic difficulty ; but 
its oldest interpretation, in the LXX, is ^diXvyfia 
ip7ifiu}(Ttui, which exactly agrees with the expression 
in 1 Mac I*"). The courts, too, of the temple were 
polluted bv indecent orgies. At the same time the 
worship or Zeus Xenios was instituted in the Sam. 
temple on Mt. Gerizim. The festivals of Bacchus 
were introduced into the various towns, and the 
Jews compelled to take part in them (2 Mac 
6^). A monthly search was made (1 Mac 1") ; and 
the possession of a cony of the b<x)k of the law 
was punishable by death. Similar measures were 
taken in all the cities frequented by the Jews in 

the Syrian kingdom, and even in Egypt (2 Mac 
6*-*). The effect upon the better Jews was to 
arouse a spirit of heroism, which showed itself at 
first only in an inflexible refusal to renounce 
Judaism. ' They chose to die . . . and they died ' 
(1 Mac 1*3) ; and 2 Mac 6"-7" records with licence 
certain instances which are further elaborated in 
4 Mac, and of which Philo makes use in Quod 
omnis prob. lib. § 13 (Man";, ii. 459). Open resist- 
ance occurred first at Mouin (Mw5etc or 'iJluhedfi), 
a mountain village E. of Lydda and N. W, of Jerus, 
When the king's commissioner came to see that 
the edict was obeyed, Mattathias, the head of the 
priestly Hasmontean family, refused compliance, 
killed the officer, and fled to the hills (1 Mac 2"-*8 ; 
Jos. Ant. XII. vi. 2: a tradition ascribes the first 
rising to an outrage attempted upon a Jewish 
bride). His example was imitated by many others 
(1 Mac 2^); but a great slaughter of them took 
place through their refusal to defend themselves on 
a Sabbath (1 Mac 23--»*). Mattathias persuaded 
his followers that the law of the Sabbath did not 
override the right of defence, and was joined by 
many of the Asidoeans ('Acri5a?oi, on'pq ^ASIDIM), 
His bands traversed the country, harassing the 
Syrians with a guerilla warfare, everywhere de- 
stroying the symbols of idolatry ( 1 Mac 2*''^''). 

Towards the end of B.C. 167 Mattathias died, 
and was succeeded in the military chieftainship of 
his party by his son Judas Maccabajus (wh. see). 
After pursuing for a time with invariable success 
his fatlier's practice of cutting oft' small companies 
of the enemy by surprises, Judas found his 
followers strong and expert enough to be trusted in 
larger enterprises. In turn he routed an army of 
Syrians and Samaritans under the command of 
Apollonius, and a greater host at Bethhoron under 
Seron, the general of Cojle-Syria (1 Mac 3'""-^ ; Jos. 
Ant. XII. vii. 1). When news of the revolt of Judfca 
reached A., he himself was obliged to set out upon 
an expedition into Parthia and Armenia, where 
insurrection was spreading and the taxes were 
withheld (Tac. Hist. v. 8 ; App. Syr. 4.5 ; Miiller, 
Fragm. ii. 10). But he left Lysias behind, as 
regent and guardian of his son, with orders to 
depopulate Judaja (1 Mac 3'=*-^; Jos. Ant. XII. vii. 2). 
Lysias at once despatched a large body of troops 
under the command of Ptolemy, Nicanor, and 
Gorgias ; and with them came merchants to 
purchase the expected Jewish slaves (1 ]Mac 3*^'*'). 
At Emmaus ('E/i/uaouyu, the modern Amwfls), Judas 
inflicted so signal a defeat upon Gorgias that the 
Syrian troops fled out of the country (1 Mac 4*-'). 
In B.C. 165 Lysias in person led a stift larger army 
against Judas, but was completely defeated at 
Bethzur (1 Mac 4^^"^ ; Jos. Ant. xil. vii. 5). Judas 
regained possession of the entire country except 
the citadel in Jerus., and on the 25th of Chislev 
the daily sacrifices were restored (1 Mac 4", 2 Mac 
10' ; Jos. Ant. XII. vii. 6 and 7 ; Middoth, i. 6 ; 
Meaillath Tannith, §§ 17, 20, 23). Meanwhile A. 
had been baffled in an attempt to plunder in 
Elymais (1 Mac 6^) the temple of Nanaia ('the 
desire of women,' Dn IP-, identified witli Artemis, 
Polyb. xxxi. 11; with Aplirodite, App. Syr. 60; 
or more probably with Adonis or Tammuz). He 
retired to Babylon, and thence to Taboe in Persia, 
where he became mad and died (B.C. 164). 

LiTKRATURE. — Liv. xli.-xlv.; Polyb. xxvi.-xxxi.; App. iSyr. in, 
CO ; Justin, xxiv. 3, are the principal classical authorities. I>n 
X121-45 is generally interpreteil of A. iv. (Jerome, ad Dan. c. 11'), 
and he is supposed to have been in the thought of the writer <>f 
Rev 138. The Megillath Antwchiui is legonciary, post-Talmudic 
in date, and of little worth as history. Dbreiibourjr, HiM. 
.'lO-C"?, extracts from Megillath Taanith, which, with 1 and 2 
Mac and Jos. Ant. xu. v., is the only Jewish source of value. 

R. W. Moss. 
ANTIOCHUS Y. {Evwdrup, 'born of a noble 
father') succeeded his father. A, Epiphanes, in 




B.C. 164, at the age of 9 (App. Syr. 46, 66) or 
of 11 (Euseb. Chron. Arm. i. 348) years. Epiph. 
had appointed his foster-brother (2 Mac 9*) Philip 
aa his son's guardian ( 1 Mac 6^ ** ; Jos. A nt. XU. 
ix. 2) ; but Lysias, the governor of the provinces 
from the Euphrates to Egypt, assumed that 
function (1 Mac 3**). In B.C. 163 Lysias and A. 
led an expedition to the relief of Jems., vrhich was 
being besieged by Judas Maccab. (1 Mac 6^*"* ; Jos. 
Ant. XII. L\. 3). The armies met at Bethzacharias, 
some 9 miles to the N. of Bethsura (Bethzur), 
where Judas was defeated (Jos. Ant. XII. ix. 4; 
Wars, I. i. 5 ; 1 Mac 6«). [2 Mac 13»- ^, on the other 
hand, represents Judas as victorious, but is clearly 
unhistorical.] A. took Bethsura, and proceeded 
to lay siege to Jems. Within the city scarcity of 
food "was soon felt, as the year was a Sabbatical 
one (1 Mac 6^) ; and news that Philip was 
approaching Antioch was received by the besiegers. 
Peace was made on the condition that the Jews 
should be left undisturbed in their national 
customs (I Mac 6», 2 Mac 13^) ; but A. violated 
this condition by destroying the city fortifications 
and imprisoning the high priest (1 Mac 6**; Jos. 
Ant. XII. ix. 7). PhUip was conquered with ease at 
Antioch ; but in B.C. 162 A. himself was betrayed 
into the hands of his cousin, Demetrius Soter, and 
put to death {1 Mac V, 2 Mac 14*; Jos. Ant. xn. 
X. 1 ; App. Syr. 47; Polvb. xxxi. 19; Liv. EpU. 46). 

R. W. Moss. 
ANTIOCHUS YI. (sumamed lS.ri<t>avr]$ Xiovwo^ on 
coins, but debs in Jos. Ant. xni. vii, 1) was a son of 
Alexander Balas (App. Syr. 68) and Cleopatra. 
In B.C. 14.5, while stul a child, he was brought 
from Arabia, where he had remained with his 
father's captor, and set up by Diodotus (Tryphon, 
wh. see) as a claimant to the throne of Syria, 
then held by Demetrius Nikator. Tryphon secured 
the support of the Syrian generals, and of Jonathan 
(wh. see), who was appointed to the civil and 
ecclesiastical, Simon to the military, headship of 
Pal.: and A. was acknowledged as king by the 
greater part of Syria. The success of Jonathan 
in subduing the whole country from Tyre and 
Damascus to Egypt aroused the jealousy or the 
fear of Tryphon, who, by stratagem, imprisoned 
and afterwards put him to death (B.C. 143). The 
next year (or possibly later : see Jos. Ant. Xin. 
vii. 1 ;' 1 :Mac 13^^ ; App. Syr. 67, 68 ; Justin, xxxvi. 
1 ; but the evidence of coins is in favour of the 
earlier date) Tryphon procured the assassination of 
A. by surgeons (Liv. Epit. 55), and assumed the 
crown of S. Syria in his stead. R. W. Moss. 

ANTIOCHUS YIL (sumamed 'Li^rip, from the 
place of his education. Side in Pamphylia, Euseb. 
Chron. Arm. i. 349 ; also euo-e^SiJj in Jos. Ant. Xlii. 
viii. 2 ; and eveprytTrjs on coins) was the second son of 
Demetrius Soter. In B.C. 138 he expelled Tryphon, 
and without further opposition obtained the throne 
of Syria. At first he confirmed to Simon im- 
munities granted by former kings, and added the 
right of coining money (I Mac 15-*'); but after- 
wards demanded the surrender of the principal 
fortresses (1 Mac 15**"*^). Simon refused to give 
them up. and defeated the king's officer Cendebaeus 
(I Mac 161-'*; Jos. Ant. XIII. vii. 3). In B.C. 135 
A. in person led an army into Judjea, and besieged 
Jems. The siege lasted for many months, in the 
course of which A. sent sacrifices into the city at 
the Feast of Tabernacles (Jos. Ant. xni. viii. 2),* but 
allowed no provisions to pass his lines. Peace was 
at length made on terms which restored the Syrian 
supremacy (Jos. Ant. xin. viii. 3), without unduly 

f revoking the intervention of Rome (ib. Xlll. ix. 2). 
n B.C. 129 Hyrcanus (wh. see) accompanied A. 
in an expedition against the Parthians, but the 
next vear the king fell in battle with Arsaces ^^I. 

{ib. xm. viii. 4; App. Syr. 68; Justin, xxxviii. 10; 
Liv. Epit. 55). R. VV. Moss. 

AKTIPA8 (Antipater). — See under Hekod. 

ANTIPAS CAjTrfxaj).— Only mentioned in Rev 2", 
in the Epistle to the Church of Pergamum, in the 
following terms : ' I know where thou dwellest, 
where the throne of Satan is ; and thou boldest my 
name, and didst not deny my faith, even (or and) 
in the days of Antipas (nominative), my witness, 
(my) faithful one, who was slain among yon, 
where Satan dwelleth.* Some authorities insert ir 
oTj ('in which') after the word 'days'; and two 
versions take the word Antipas as a verb, drrei-ras 
('thou didst contradict'); but there is no pro- 
bability that this is correct. WH think it not 
unlikely that 'Arrira in the gen. should be read. 

Various allegorical interpretations of the name 
are current, one making A. the withstander of 
all, and identifying him with Timothy; another 
descending as low as Antipas= Antipapa. But the 
name must in all likelihood be that of a real man, 
and is probably a shortened form of Antipater. 

Antipas does not occor in the lists of the 70 disciples 
(PseiKL-Dorotheas, Solomon of BasimX bat Andreas and Aretlias, 
the commentators on the Apocalypse, qieak <rf having read the 
acts of his martyrdom. These aie to be found in the Acta 
Sanetcrvm, April 11 (April, torn. iL i^ 2, 4, and 967). Th^ are 
rtietorical and late in their present form, and give no par- 
ticolan ot the sainf s life. ISiey represent him to being cast 
into a heated braxen ball in the temple of Arteoois, by oarder 
of a nameteas govenKH' during Doonitian's persecution. He was 
apparently Kshop of Pergammn. According to one form of his 
Acts (qooted by the BoUandists from a Sjmozarwm), he prayed 
that UHise snlferii^ from toothache might be relieved at his 
tomb. The boll in which he suffered was shown at Con- 
stantinople (Cedremis, .566, ed. Par.}. In the Ethiopia calendar 
his day is the 16th of Slirazia. M. R. JaMES. 

ANTIPATER {'Ain-iraTpos). —A., son of Jason, was 
one of two ambassadors sent by Jonathan to the 
Romans and to the Spartans to renew ' the friend- 
ship and the confederacy' (I Mac 12'* 14**). 

J. A. Selbee. 

ANTIPATRIS CArrlrarpu), Ac 23«.— A city at 
the foot of the Judaean hills, on the road from 
Jerusalem to Ciesarea : founded by Herod theGreat. 
The various notices of its position, in relation to 
places near, are fully explained by placing this 
city at the large ruined mound above the source 
of the 'Aujah River, north-east of JafiFa. This site 
is now called E^ts el'Ain, 'the spring-head'; the 
Greek name having, as is usual in Palestine, been 
lost. The ruins include the shell of a large medi- 
aeval castle, which is probably that called Mirabel 
in the 12th cent. For a fml discussion of this 
question, see SWP vol. ii. sheet xiiL Joseph us has 
been wrongly supposed to place Antipatris at 
Caphar Saba, farther north {Ant. xin. xv. 1, 
XVI. V. 2 ; Wars, L xxL 9). C. R. CoxDER. 

ANDB (3?33r)- 

A man of Judah (1 Ch 4'). See 

AHYIL (cr?, a stroke, blow). — The word occurs 
with this meaning only in Is 4F. The anvil of 
the East is a boot-shaped piece of metal inserted 
in a section of oak or walnut log. Larger or 
smaller, it is used by tinsmiths, shoemakers, silver- 
smiths, and blacksmiths. The description of the 
metal worker in Is 41^^ is one that might have 
been taken from the Arab workshop of the present 
day. As the Oriental artisan has only a few simple 
tools at his command, his work lacks the precision 
and uniformity attained in the West by elaborate 
machinery. Hence vivacious comment during the 
process ot manufactnre, and a feeling of triimiph 
at times when the article turns out according to 
sample. The act of welding on the anvil, to which 
the prophet alludes, is esp. a moment of noisy 




enthusiasm and mutual encouragement between 
the smith and his fellow-workman on the other 
side of the anvil. They then call out to each other 
to strike more rapidly and vigorously, before the 
metal cools, crying 'shiddl shield' I the Arabic 
equivalent of Isaiah's * hazak' I 'bo of good 
courage ! ' Then the t«rm applied to the soldering 
— 'tob' ! Arab, '(ayyib' ! that is, 'good' !— is at once 
a call to cease from further hammering, and a 
declaration that the work is satisfactory. 

G. M. Mackie. 
ANY. — 1. Being probably composed of an one, 
and dim, ending y (old Eng. ig), ' any ' means ' one 
at all,' 'one of whatever kind.' Of this orig. 
meaning good examples are Ps 4' ' Who will show 
us any good ? ' 2 P 3" ' not willing that any should 
perish.' 2. Any is not now used in the sing, with- 
out ' one,' ' more,' or the like, but we find Jer 23'^ 
' Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall 
not see him ? ' Ezk 7^' ' neither shall any strengthen 
himself ; so Zee 13^ Jn 2* etc, 3. Any thing as 
an adverb = ' at all,' 'in any respect, is found 
2 Ch 9^ ' it (silver) was not any thin" (RV ' was 
nothing') accounted of; Gal 6* 'neither circum- 
cision availeth any thing' (RV 'anything'); Nu 
j-jis • "Whosoever Cometh any thing near unto the 
tabernacle of the Lord shall die' (RV ' Every one 
that cometh near, that cometh near unto the tab. 
of the Lord, dieth ') ; and even (Ac 25") ' neither 
. . . have I- ofl'ended any thing at all ' (RV ' have 
I sinned at all'). 4. Any ways = in any respect, 
mod. 'anywise,' occurs Lv 20^ 'if the people or the 
land do any ways hide their eyes from the man ' ; 
Nu SO^"* 'if he shall any ways make them void' 
(RV 'if he shall make tliem null and void') ; 2 Ch 
32". Cf. Pr. lik. 'All those who are any ways 
atllicted.' J, Hastings. 

APACE. — ' Apace ' meant first of all 'at a foot 
])ace,' i.e. slowly. But before 1611 it had acquired 
the opp. meanmg, 'at a quick pace,' and in that 
sense only is it used in AV. It occurs 2 S IS^'^ 
'And he came a.' (TjiSn Ti^n) ; Ps 68^2 'Kings of 
armies did flee a.' (jn'T jn^;, RV 'flee, they flee') ; 
Jer 46' ' their mighty ones . , . are fled a.' Also 
in Ps 68«, Pr. Bk. (and RV, v.'') ' like water that 
runneth a.' ; and Sir 43" ' He maketh the snow to 
fall a.' (KaTfffiTd'ffe x'o»'a). Cf. Ps in Metre 92^ — 

' When those that lewd and wicked are 

spring quickly up like gniSB, 
And workers of iniquity 

do flourish all apace.' 

'Gallop apace, you flerj'-foote<l steeds.' 

Shaks. Ham. and Jul. iil. 2. 1. 

' Small weeds have grace, great weeds do grow apace.' 

Hich. III. ii. 4. 13. 

J, Hastings. 
APAME {'Xvifi-q). — Daughter of Bartacus, and 
concubine of Darius I. ( 1 Es 4*), 

APES (c'5'ip, hophim, viOr)Koi, simiac). — Animals 
of the simian type, imported by the merchant 
navy of Solomon (1 K 10'^, 2 Ch 9'^). There is 
no reason to believe that any one kind, or even 
family, of apes is intended. Many kinds were 
known to the ancients, and the snips of Asia 
and Africa constantly brought then, as they do 
now, various species of apes and monkeys. Aris- 
totle divides the simians into three groups — the 
KTi^oi, the viOriKoi, and the kwoa-^^Xo*. But it is 
clear that the translators of the LXX did not 
understand k^^oi to be the equivalent of Icophim, 
for they have translated the latter TlOrjicoi. As a 
naturalist, Solomon would no doubt have wishefl 
specimens of as many kinds as possible of so curious 
an animal as the ape, and, regis ad exemplar, it 
would have been fashionable among his courtiers 

to possess these grotesque mimics of humanity. 
Hence the steady market for apes as well aa 
peacocks and ivory. G. E. PoST, 

APELLES ('ATreXX^j). — The name of a Christian 
greeted by St. Paul in Ro lU'", and described as 
the 'approved in Christ.' It was the name borne 
by a distinguished tragic actor, and by members of 
the household. Most commentators quote also 
Hor. Sat. i. 5. 100, Credat ludoius Apellu, non ego. 
See Lightfoot, Philippians, p. 172 ; Sanday and 
Headlam, Romans, p. 425. Vor later traditions, 
which are valueless, see Acta Sand., April, iii. 4, 

A, C, Ukadlam. 

APH;EREMA i'A(f>flptfia}, 1 Mac 11^.— A district 
taken from Samaria and added to Juda;a by De- 
metrius Soter (Ant. XIII. iv. 9), probably that round 
the city Ephraim. C. R. Conder. 

APHARSACHITES.— See next article. 

APHARSATHCHITES (Kjjpcnw? Ezr 4», probably 

the same as the Apharsachites,* «:?9*!5>« Ezr 6* 6'). — 
A colony of the Assyrians in Samaria ; an eastern 
people subject to the Assyrians. Ewald (//./. iv. 
1878, p. 216) identifies them with the llap-rjraKrjvol 
(Herod. L 101), a tribe of the Medas, dwelling on 
the borderland between Media and Persia. 

J. Macpherson, 
APHARSITES (n:.V15« Ezr 49).— One of the nations 
transported to Samaria by the Assyrians. Otlier- 
wise unknown. By many (e.g. Lwald, //./. iv. 
216) supposed to be Persians ; ons with the 
prosthetic n in tlie Heb. form. Others have con- 

iecturally identified them with the Parrhasians of 
C. Media. J. Macphekson, 

APHEK (psN 'a fortress'). — This was the name 
of at least four places in Palestine. 

1. A city whose king was slain by Joshua (Jos 
12^8), where we should read with the LXX, ' the 
king of Aphek in Sharon.' This is probably the 
city mentioned in 1 S 4^ The Israelites were 
at Ebenezer, between Mizpeh and Shen. With 
common consent Mizpeh is located at Neby Samwil, 
but Shen is unknown, so Ebenezer and Aphek still 
await identification. Kakon, in the plain of Sharon, 
a strong position commanding the main entrance 
to Samaria, would suit admirably, but no echo of 
the ancient name has been heard in tlie district, 

2. A city in the territoiy of Asher (Jos 13* 
19^") from which the Canaanites were never 
expelled (Jg P^ — where it is written p'?8). 
Apparently in the vicinity of Achzib, its position 
is uncertain, A possible identification is 'Afka on 
the Adonis, Nahr Ibrahim, but this seems to be 
too far north. 

3. A spot, generally supposed to be in the plain 
of Esdraelon, whence the Philistines advanced to 
the battle of GUboa (1 S 29'). Wellhausen and W. 
R. Smith give reasons for thinking this identical 
with 1 ; and G. A. Smith now agrees (PEFSt, 
1895, 252). If the identity is established, the 
Philistines assembled in Sharon, and approached 
Jezreel by way of Dothan. If, however, they 
moved from Shunem to Aphek, against Saul, the 
place must be sought in some ' fortress ' westward 
of Jezreel ; the fountain near which Israel was 
encamped being most likely 'Ain Jalihl, at the N. 
base of Gilboa. Fukua, on the mountain itself, 
is hardly possible. 

4. The scene of Benhadad's disastrous defeat 
(I K 20-''-*'). This place was in the mishOr, nie*'?, 
the table-land east of the Jordan, and is probably 
identical with Fik, on the lip of the valley eastward 

• Kostcrs thinks that Apharsachites of Ezr 6" C is an official 
title which the author of 40 has mistaken (or U\e name of a tribe 
or country (HerHel v. Itr. 86 1.). 



of Kal'ot d-Husn, overlooking the Sea of Galilee. 
File is just the Heb. word without the initial 
aleph ; but occasionally one hears the natives call it 
'Afik, when the ancient name appears entire. From 
the edge of the valley eastward stretches the plain, 
iiushr/r, of Jaultin, where the great battle waif 
fouyht. Here the Syrians again suffered defeat at 
the hands of Joash {2 K 13^"-*). 

LrranjLTrRK.— W. B. Smith, OTJC^ pp. 273, 435 ; WellhaaseD. 
Comp. d. Hex. p. 254. Uitt. p. 39; O. A. Smith, HM. Gtoj. 
Index, and esp. CrU. Jiev. (1892), p. 409L W. EWING. 

APHEKAH (."!i55»{). — A city not yet clearly identi- 
fied. It may hare been in tlie mountains of 
Judah (Jos 15^), but is probably the same place 
asAphek 1. W. Ewiso. 

APHERRA {'A<peppd), 1 Es 5".— His descendants 
were among the ' sons of Solomon's ser\'ants ' who 
returned with Zerubbabel. This name, with the 
five preceding and two succeeding names, has no 
equivalent in the parallel lists of Ezr and Neh. 
H. St. J. Thackeray. 

APHIAH (-'?»«).— One of Saul's ancestors (1 S 9»). 

APHIK (p?K).— A city of Asher (Jg 1»), the same 
as Aphek 2. 

APHRAH.— See Beth-ue-Aphrah. 

APOCALYPSE. — See KevelatiO-V. 


study Christianity in its origins can dispense with 
a knowledge of this literature. If we wish to 
reconstruct the world of ideas and aspirations 
which fUled the heart of an earnest Jew at the 
beginning of the Christian era, it is to this litera- 
ture that we must have recourse for materials. 
Although in its higher a.spects Christianity in- 
finitely transcends the Judaism that preceded it, 
yet in others it Ls a genuine historical development 
from such Judaism. Christianity came forth from 
the bosom of Pharisaic Judaism, and in Apoca- 
lyptic literature this form of Judaism found its 
essential utterance. The value, therefore, of such 
literature is obvious. From such writings, further, 
we see how the great Pharisaic movement arose ; 
how it in its turn had been a transformation and a 
development of movements already at work in 
the prophetic period. Thus Jewish Apocalypses 
not only supply a history of religious beliefs in 
the two pre-Christian centuries, but thev also till 
up the otherwise unavoidable gap in the history of 
Jewish thought, and constitute the living link 
between the prophetic teachings and ideals of the 
OT and their fulfilment in Christianity. 

Apocalyptic took the place of Prophecy. The 
Psalmist exclaims with grief: 'We see not our 
signs : there is no more any prophet : neither is 
there among us any that knoweth how long' (Ps 

But the immediate successor of Prophecy was not 
Apocalyptic, but Scribism. The task of the 
scribes was to study the law and apply it to the 
altered circumstances of the time. As a result of 
their study and teaching, Israel was firmly estab- 
lished in its adhesion to the law. But Scribism 
could not satisfy the aspirations of the nation. In 
one aspect we might describe it as an improductive 
age of criticism following a productive age of pro- 
phetic genius. Its chief task was to study, dis- 
criminate, and systematise the products of past 
spiritual genius. For ever engaged in distingtiish- 
ing and criticising, it acquired the habits of caution 
and fear as it lost those of courage and love. Its 
maxims were mainly negative. Its highest service 

was, not to inspire aad lead into new paths of duty 
and goodness, out to confine every enthusiasm and 
new spiritual force within the narrow limits of a 
traditional routine, and to close every avenue of 
danger with a flaming sword and the unvarying 
prohibition : ' Thou shalt not.' 

But Scribism had another side. In times of 
oppression especially, its efforts were directed to 
finding an answer for hearts that were asking in 
their anguish when God would visit and redeem 
His people. By ignoring the fact that the pro- 
phetic accounts of an ideal future for Israel could 
not be literally fulfilled after the fall of the ancient 
State, they easily found materials in the mass of 
unfulfilled prophecy on which to build their hopes 
anew. By symbolising what was literal and 
literaUsing what was figurative, by various re- 
arrangements and readjustments of the resulting 
products, they were able to depict the future in a 
certain chronological sequence, and arrive at this 
desired consummation. By such means Scribism 
in some measure kept alive the hopes of the nation. 

It was to this side of Scribism that Apocalyptic 
was naturally related, although at the same time 
it was to a certain extent a revolt against the other 
and chief purstut of Scribism. The higher ideals 
and larger outlook of Apocalyptic failed in due 
course to find room within the narrow limits of 
Scribism ; and whereas the anxious scrupulosities 
of the latter were incompatible with anything but 
the feeblest inspiration and vigour, the former 
attested beyond doubt the reappearance of spiritual 
genius in the field of thought and action. 

Our conception of Apocalyptic will become 
clearer by observing wherein it agrees with, and 
wherein it differs from, OT prophecy. 

1. Prophecy and Apocalyptic agree in this — (1) 
That they both claim to be a communication 
through the Divine Spirit of the character and 
will and purposes of God, and of the laws and 
nature of His kingdom. This, it is needless to 
add, man could not attain to by himself. 

(2) But Prophecy and Apocalyptic were related, 
not only in their primary postulate, but, at least 
in the case of the later prophets, in similarity of 
materials and method. Thus the eschatological 
element which later attained its ftill growth in the 
writings of Daniel, Enoch, Xoah, etc. , had already 
strongly asserted itself in the later prophets, such 
as Is 24-27, Joel, Zee 12-U. Not only the be- 
ginnings, therefore, but a well-defined type of this 
literature had already established itself in OT 

2. But Prophecy and Apocalyptic differ in the 
following respects : — 

(1) Fropheey still believes that this world is GocTs 
world, and that in this world His goodness and 
truth will yet he justified. Hence the prophet 
addresses himself chiefly to the present and its 
concerns, and when he addresses himself to the 
future his prophecy springs naturally from the 
present, and the future which he depicts is regarded 
as in organic connexion with it. The Apocalyptic 
writer, on the other hand, almost wholly detpairs 
of the present; his main interests are supra- 
mundane. He cherishes no hope of arousing his 
contemporaries to faith and duty by direct and 
personal appeals ; for though Grod spoke in the 
past, 'there is no more any prophet.' This 
pessimism and want of faith in the present, alike 
in the leaders and the led, limited and defined the 
form in which the religious ardour of the former 
j should manifest itself. They prescribed, in fact, 
as a necessity of the age and as a condition of 
successful etiort, the adoption of pseudonymotts 
authorship. And thus it is that the Apocalyptic 
writer approaches his countrymen with a work 
which claims to be the production of some great 



figure in the past, such as Enoch, Moses, Isaiah, 
Daniel, or liaruch. 

Thus far two characteristics of Apocalyptic have 
emerged — the transference of interest from the 
present to the future, from the mundane to the 
supra-mundane, and tlie adoption of pseudonymous 

(2) Another feature of Apocalyptic as distin- 
guished from Prophecy was imposed upon it by the 
necessities of the time, i.e. its indejinitehj wider 
view of the world's history. Thus, -whereas ancient 
I'rophecy had to deal with tempurary reverses at 
the hands of some heathen power. Apocalyptic 
arose at a time when Israel had been subject for 
centuries to the sway of one or another of the 
great world-powers. Hence, in order to harmonise 
such difliculties witli God's righteousness, it had to 
take account of the rule of such empires in the 
counsels of God ; to recount the sway and down- 
fall of each in turn, till, finally, the lordship of the 
world passed into the hands of Israel, or the final 
judgment arrived. The chief part of these events 
Wlonged, it is true, to the past; but the Apocalyptic 
writer represented them as stUl in the future, 
arranged under certain artificial categories of time, 
and as definitely determined from the berinning 
in the counsels of God, and revealed by Him to 
His servants the prophets. Determinism thus 
became a leading c/utractcristic of Jewish Apoca- 
lyptic ; and accordingly its conception of history. 
Its distinguished from that of Prophecy, was 
mechanical rather than organic. 

(3) Again, Prophecy and Apocalyptic differ in the 
harsher treatment dealt out to the heathen in tlie 
final judgments. Israel's repeated oppressions have 
at last affected the judgment and insight of its 
writers. The iron has entered into their soul. 
No virtue or goodness can belong to their heathen 
oppressors, and nothing but eternal destruction can 
await the enemies of Israel in the time to come. 
The ruthless cruelty they had experienced, inspired 
them with a like ruthlessness towards the faithless 
nation and the faithless individual ; and expressions 
descriptive of the future lot of such, whicn in pro- 
phetic writings had been limited in their scope to 
the present life, or were merely poetical exaggera- 
tions, were acce])ted by Apocalyptic writers as true 
of the future, and often intensified because in- 
sufficient to satisfy their merciless hatred. Thus 
it was in this period that the doctrine of the 
future and eternal damnation of the wicked was 
definitely formulated, and came to possess an un- 
questioned authority. It is true tliat in later 
limes, as we discover from the Talmud, the severity 
of this dogma was considerably moderated, but 
only in favour of Israelites. No single mitigation 
of the awful horrors foretold as awaiting the 
wicked was extended to the hapless Gentile. 

The foregoing Avill make the object of Apoca- 
Ivptic easy of compreliension. This object, in 
sliort, was to solve the difficulties connected with 
a belief in God's righteousness, and the suffering 
condition of His servants on earth. The righteous- 
ness of God postulated the temporal prosperity of 
the righteous, and this postulate was accepted and 
enforced by the law. But the expectations of 
material •wellbeing whicli had thus been authenti- 
cated and fo.stered, had in the centuries immediately 
preceding been fal.sified, and thus a grave con- 
tradiction had emerged between the old prophetic 
ideals and the actual experience of the nation, 
between the promises of God and the bondage and 
persecution they had daily to endure at the hands 
of their pagan ojipressors. The difliculties thus 
arising from this conflict between promise and 
experience may be shortly resolved into two, which 
concern respectively the po.-jition of tlie righteous 
OS a community and the position of the righteous 

man as an individual. The <>T propliets had 
concerned themselves cliiefly with the former, and 
pointed in the main to the restoration or ' resur- 
rection ' of Israel as a nation, and to Israel's 
ultimate possession of the eartli as a reward of 
her righteousness. IJut, later, with tlie growing 
claims of the individual, and tfie acknowledgment 
of tliese in the religious and intellectual life, the 
latter problem pressed itself irresistibly on the 
notice of religious thinkers, and made it impossible 
for any concei)tion of the divine rule and righteous- 
ness to gain acceptance whi<;h did not render 
adequate satisfaction to the claims of the righteous 
individual. Thus, in order to justify the righteous- 
ness of God, there was postulated the resurrection, 
not only of the righteous nation, but also of the 
righteous individual. Apocalyptic, tiierefore, 
strove to show that, alike in respect of the nation 
and of tlie individual, the ri'^hteousness of God 
would be fully vindicated ; and, in order to justify 
its contention, it sketched in outline the hi.story of 
the world and of mankind, the origin of evil and 
its course, and the consummation of all tilings. 
Thus, in fact, it presented a Semitic philosonhy of 
religion. The righteous as a nation sliould yet 
possess the earth either in an eternal or in a 
temporary Messianic kingdom, and the destiny of 
the righteous individual should be finally deter- 
mined according to his works. For though amid 
the world's disorders he miglit perish untimely, he 
would not fail to attain through the resurrection 
the recompense that was his due, in the Messianic 
kingdom, or in heaven itself. The conceptions as 
to the risen life, its duration and cliaracter, vary 
with each writer. 

The chief Apocalyptic writings which will be 
treated of in this Dictionary are — 

1. Apocalypse of Baruch, a composite work 
written 50-91) A.D. in Palestine, if not in Jerus., 
by four Pharisees. Preserved only in Syriac. 

2. Ethiopic Book of Enoch, written" originally 
in Heb. by at least five Hasid authors, 2U0-(V4 
B.C., in Palestine. Preserved in Ethiopic and 
partly in Greek and Latin. 

3. Slavonic Book of Enoch, or The Book of the 
Secrets of Enoch, written by an Alexandrian Jov 
about the beginning of the Christian era. Pre- 
served only in Slavonic. 

4. Ascension of Isaiah, a composite work written, 
1-1(X) A.D., by Jewish and Ciiristian authors. Pre- 
served in Ethiopic and partly in I^atin. 

5. Book of Jubilees, written originally in Hebrew 
hj a Pal. Jew, probably 40-10 B.C. Preserved in 
Ethiopic, and partially in Hebrew, Syriae, Greek, 
and Latin. 

6. Assumption of Moses, written in Palestine, 
probably in Heb. or Aram., 14-30 A.D., by a 
Pharisee. Preserved only in Latin. 

7. Testaments of the XII. Patriarch-^, a com- 
posite work written originally in Hebrew by two 
Jewish authors belonging to the legalistic and 
apocalyptic sides of Pharisaism, 130 B.C.-IO A.D., 
and interpolated by a succession of Christian 
writers down to the fourth century A.D. Pre- 
served in the ancient Greek and Armenian ver- 

8. Psalms of Solomon, written originally in 
Heb. by a Pharisee (or Pharisees), 70-40 B.C. 

9. Sibylline Oracles, Mrttten in Greek hexa- 
meters by Jewish and Christian authors, 180B.C.- 
350 A.D. 

LiTERATiRB.— Hilgrenfeld, Die Jiidxgche Apoknlijptik, 1857; 
Drutuinond, The Jeicuh Mestiah, 1877 ; Smend, ' Jewish Apoca- 
I.vplic' in ZATW (1885) pp. 222-250; Schiirer, UJP ii. iii. 


R. H. Charles. 

APOCRYPHA.— The title 'The Apocrj-pha,' or 
' The Apocrypha of the OT,' is appUed by English- 




sj>eaking Protestants to the following collection of 
books and parts of books : — 


i. 1 E^dras 

ii. -2 Esdras 

iii. Tobit 

iv. Judith 

V. The rest of the chapters of the Book of Esther 

li.e. 1(H-16W] 

vi. The Wisdom of Solomon 

viL The Wisdom of Jesus the son of Siiach, or 


viii. Banioh . . ... 

[Ch. vi. = The Epistle of Jeremy] 
ix. The Songof the Three Holy Children . 

[i.e. The Prayer of Azairias and the Song of 
the Three.]" 

X. The History of Susanna 

xi> The History of the Destructicm of Bel and the 


[ix. X. and xL are the Additions to the Book 

of Daniel] 

xii. The Prayer of Manasseg 

xiii. 1 Maccabees 

xiv. 2 Maccabees 


Ad. Est 

Ep. Jer 



Ad. Dn 

Both the collection, and the use of the word 
Apocrypha as its title, are distinctively Protestant, 
though having roots in the history of the OT 
Canon. The collection consists of the excess of the 
Lat. Vulg. over the Heb. OT ; and this excess is 
due to the Gr. LXX, from which the old Lat. 
VS was made. The ditierence between the Prot. and 
the Rom. Cath. OT goes back, then, to a dilierence 
between Pal. and Alex. Jews. The matter is 
complicated, however, bv the fact that the Vulg. 
was rei.'ised after the fieb. by Jerome, and that 
the extant MSS of the LXX dilier much in contents 
and order. For clearness and for reference in the 
later discussion, the following tables are given. 
They represent the official Vulg. (ed. 1592) ; the 
two' chief MSS of LXX ; the Canon of Cyril, as a 
representative of the view of the E. Church ; and the 
Hebrew. The books of our A. are printed in italics, 
other uncan. books, not in the A., in capitals. 

these, 1 and 2 Es are not in Luther's Bible, and 

2 Es is not in the LXX. On the other hand, 

3 and 4 Mac are commonly present in the 
LXX, but are not found in the Vmg. and A. The 
same is true of Ps 151. Further, the many more or 
less significant variations of LXX from *Heb. OT, 
in text and order, do not appear in this comparison, 
for, owing to Jerome, the Vulg. foUows the Heb. 
in the can. books, the LXX only in the case of 
books not extant in Heb. The A., then, can be 
said only in a general way to represent the 
difference between the Heb. and the Gr. OT. The 
books of the A. are treated in this Dictionary 
individually under their titles. Under the heading 
Apocrypha two matters require consideration : the 
history of the use of the word ' Apooyph/i' in 
reference to books ; and the history and significance 
of the collection now so called.* ' With these the 
present article will deal in the following order : — 

L The word Apocrypha. 

1. The Hidden Bo<A8 of Judaism. 

2. The words genuzim and huottim. 

3. The Hidden Books of Christianity, and the word 

u. The Apocr>-pha in Judaism. 

1- The Orij^ of the Collection. 

a. The Work of the Scribes. 

b. The A. in relation to the Hagiographa. 

e. Palestinian and Hellenistic elements in the A. 

2. Its Use and Relation to the Canon. 

a. In Hellenistic Judaism. 

b. In Palestinian Judaism. 

3. Its Relation to the Religious Tendencies and 

Parties of Judaism. 
iiL The Apocrypha in Christianity. 

1. In the Xew Testament. 

2. In the Eastern Church. 

a. Original Usage. 

b. 8<diolariy Tbeoiy. 
e. MaaoscnptB. 

d. Yernons. 

«. The Later Greek Church. 
8. In the Western Church. 

a. Roman. 

b. Protestant. 




Cod. Vat. (B)l 

Cod. Alex. (A). 




1-5. Pent 

L 'Torah'CLaw)— 




6. Jos 

1-5. Pent 




7. Jg-Ru 

8. 1. 2 K 

iL •Xebiim' (Prophets) — 

1-4 K 

1-4 K 


9. 3.4K 

6. Jos 
9. K 
6. 'Latter* 

11. Jer 

12. Ezk 

13. xn 

1. 2Ch 

1. 2Ch 

1. 2Ch 

10. 1. 2Ch 




IL 1.2E8 

2 Es [=>eh] 

2Es[ = Ezr+Xeh] 


12. Est[ild.T] 


Ps [151] 

Jer [with Bar La Ep, 

13. Job 

14. Ps 

Est [.Id. 104-16^] 



15. Pr 




16. Ec 



Est [Ad.*] 

17. Ca 




18. XII 




19. Is 

iiL 'Kethubim' (Hagkv 

; Ca 

Est lAd.*} 


20. Jer Bar La Ep. Jer 


1 Wit 



21. Ezk 

14. Ps 

< Sir 


1.2 Mae 

22. Da [Ad.r] 

15. Pr 

1 Is 


3. 4 Mac 

16. Job 

I Jer [La £ar] 


Ps [191 and 14 Canticles, 

i.e. 12 historical, 6 

17. Oa"\ 

1 Ezk 


of whidi one is Pr. 

poetical, and 5 prophet- 
ical books. The number 

18. Ra 1 

i Dn [Ad. 32J-» Three 



19. La VlforiOotb' 




of a»e Heb. Can. is 

20. Ec 1 

14 Be/] 



redaced by joining Bn 
to Jg and La to Jer. 

a. Estj 

XII [i.e. Minor Prophets] 



22. Dn 

I. 2 Mae 

Dn [Ad.] 



24. Ch 

After the >T, as an 
Appendix, in small tvpe 
and with new paging : 

•The Ad. Ett are in 
their original places, 
viz. 1<>* 111 after 103 ; 


After the NT stood 

this order, which is thai 

/v. Man 

112-12« before li ; l»-~ 


of the printed edd., are 


after 313; 13S.13 i^l-ia 


found m the case ot fite 

iEidr[ = 2£t]. 

15 116 after 4i7; 16I-2* 
after m. 

'latter' i»oid>et8 and 
the Hagi<%n4riia in TU- 
mudic liste, which may 

19 are from OT. The 
others — Magnificat, 

Xune dimittit, Bene- 

be more original. But 

dict ut, and the Morning 

Uie three divisions and 


the contents of each 
remain fixed. 

It is to be noticed that of our A., 1 and 2 Es and I jUl ^,*^"^:'tf ■^'^^- Hi^ ^'^S "^L^,f^/*°K 
}^ >r„ J J 1 v T» .1 TVf Apoerttpha (A.) the books originally so called ; apocryphal {a»0 

'r. Man are regarded also by Rome as a''. Of klasedm either sense »"~*-f ' 




i. THE WORD 'APOCRYPHA.'— The word 
At6icov^, meaninfj ' liidden,' was no doubt at first 
applied to books in quite a litcjral sense, as the 
designation, whether by those who liid them or by 
those from wliom they were hidden, of books kept 
from the public. The hiding of a book was easy 
when copies were few. It might be done upon two 
opposite grounds. An exclusive sect might hide 
its sacred books in order to keep from outsiders 
the secret laws or wisdom which they contained ; 
or the religious authorities of a community might 
hide books judged by them to bo useless or harm- 
ful. The two grounds might indeed approach each 
other in the case of books judged unfit for public 
use, not because of the error, but because of the 
depth and dinicultv of their contents. Indeed, a 
book jiulged wholly erroneous and harmful we 
should expect the authorities to destroy rather 
than to hide. A certain value, or at least a certain 
doubt, should naturally be attached to books 
hidden in this sense, while their peculiar value is 
the reason for their being hidden in the former — 
which is, in all probability, the more original sense 
of the Greek word. 

From the place of secret books in Judaism and 
in ChriHtianity we may therefore hope to gain a 
knowledge of the original sense and use of the 
word ; and we shall find its first and proper applica- 
tion to be, not to the books of our A., but to the 
(chiefly apocalyptical) literature commonly desig- 
nated Pseudepigrnphn. 

1. The Hidden Books of Judaism.— Esoteric 
doctrines and books do not belong properly to the 
Isr. religion. Their home is in heathenism, from 
which, however, they gained a foothold from time 
to time in Judaism. The occult lore connected 
with sorcery and magic lurked beneath the surface 
of old Israel's religious life, but was condemned by 
law and prophets (Dt 18">'-, Lv W\ Is S'^ 19-* etc.). 
No priestly religion, indeed, can be without a 
partly esoteric priestly tradition respecting rites, 
their form, and perhaps their meaning. But it was 
a characteristic of Judaism that it was based upon 
a priestly law made public and openly adopted by 
the people (Neh 8-10). Yet Judaism did not 
escape from the charm which mystery exerts over 
the human mind. It was esp. in the after de- 
velopments of OT wisdom literature under 
Hellenic influence, on the one side, and of OT pro- 
phetic literature, under Pers. and Bab. influence, 
on the other, that the idea of the superior religious 
value of hidden things, mysteriously disclosed to the 
favoured few, took possession of the Jewish mind. 
Even Jesus, son of Sirach, the Palestinian, finds 
it the chief task of the wise man to discover the 
'apocrypha,' the hidden things, of wisdom and of God 
(14M 393.7)^ and thinks that the hidden things of the 
world are greater than the manifest (43^-). ' Apoc- 
rypha' was for him a word of honour (yet see 
3'''^^ and 2428 :«). ]i„t it was esp. in Hel. circles 
that the love of hidden things was cultivated. 
Philo presents the results of his deepest study and 
reflexion, and of his highest insight, in the form of 
an exjiosition of the Pent., making of this a hidden 
book, which only the initiated could understand. 

There was, hoM-ever, another way in which the 
love of hidden things and reverence for antiquity 
could be adjusted. Instead of hidden meanings in 
openly published books, it was possible to think 
01 private teachings, by the side of the public, 
committed by natriarch or prophet to the few, and 
handed on to tnepresent in a secret tradition, or a 
hidden book. This was the procedure of those 
Pal. Jews who were interested in the secrets of 
the future, and in prophecy. The beginnings of 
the production of hidden books along this line can 
be easily traced. If a prophet committed the 
record of openly spoken predictions to the keeping 

of his disciples, to await the time of their fulfilment 
(Is 8'*), it would not be strange if he should give 
them fuller knowledge for which the public was 
not prepared. The Bk of Dan. is represented as 
having oeen ' shut up and sealed ' by its author, 
until, long after its Avriting, the time came for its 
publication (Dn 12^- *). This may well be called 
'the fundamental pa.ssage for the conception of 
apocryphn.' * Daniel appears as the publication 
of a Dook hitherto hidden. The justification of 
the claim lies in the revelation of the mysteries 
of Israel's future which it contains, and in the 
mysterious manner in which the revelation is made 
in visions, through angels. It is indeed, in part, 
an interpretation of the hidden sense of Jer 25^^ 
29^" (Dn 9), but the interpretation is given by an 
angel. The way was prepared for Daniel by the 
later prophets, in whom the vision of hidden things 
plays an increasingly important part. EzekiePs 
vision (ch. 1) became the favourite and fruitful 
study of Jews who loved mysteries. Zee con- 
tains similar material. But the chief development 
of apocalyptical literature followed Daniel. Great 
numbers of books were put forth during the cent, 
before and the cent, after Christ, in the name of 

Patriarchs or prophets, as books that had been 
idden. They contain esp. disclosures of the 
mysteries of the spirit world, of the future of 
Israel, and of the abode and fortunes of the dead. 
In one of these books the tradition is related 
that Ezra was inspired to dictate to his scribes 
the sacred books that had been burned at the 
destruction of Jerus. ' In forty days they wrote 
ninety-four books. And when the forty days were 
ended, the Most High spoke, saying : The earlier 
books that thou hast written, publish openly, and 
let the worthy and the unworthy read them ; but 
the last seventy thou shalt keep, that thou mayest 
deliver them to the wise of thy people ; for in them 
is the spring of understanding and the fountain of 
wisdom and the stream of knowledge ' (2 Es 14'""'*^). 
In the 70 esoteric books, valued more highly by 
the writer than the 24 books of open scripture, 
we have the original conception of apocrypha. 
The character of these books may be accurately 
known from those that have survived, e.g. Enoch, 
Assumption of Moses (in part), the Apoc. of 
Baruch, and 2 Est itself. Their material is 
largely foreign to Isr. traditions, and was com- 
monly felt to be so. Yet traditional it must, in 
the nature of the case, have been, and only in a 
very limited degree the free invention of the 
writers. That its source is, in an important 
measure, to be found in the Bab. and Pers. re- 
ligions, is highly probable. 

If we ask in what circles of Judaism these books, 
or the writings or traditions that lie behind them, 
were current, various lines of evidence point to- 
ward the obscure sect of the Essenes. They 
possessed a secret lore and hidden books, and took 
oath to disclose none of their doctrines to others, 
and ' to preserve equally both the books of their 
sect and the names of the angels' (Jos. BJ II. 
viii. 7). In regard to the contents of their secret 
books we are not left wholly in the dark. Jos. 
says that the Essenes derived from the study of 
'the writings of the ancients' (can. ?) a knowledge 
of the healing properties of plants and stones (S 6), 
and that by reading ' the holy books ' they were 
able to foretell future things (§ 12). He also as- 
cribes to them an elaborate doctrine of the prc- 

*• Zahn, Gewh. d. NT Kanont, 1. 135, cf. 124 f., who, however, 
does not put this observation to its natural use. 

t Noticethc'differcntapplicationsg-iventothetitles,! and 2&, 
in LXX, Vulg. and En(j. A. Still other confusions agpear in 
certain MSS. Misunderstandin); would l)e avoided by calling 
1 Es [ = Vulff. 3 Es ; LXX 1 Es] Greek Ezra, and 2 Es ( = Vulg. 
4 Es] the Apocalypse of Ezra {i.e. properly ch. 3-14), or 




existence of souls, and of the lot of good and bad 
souls after death (§ 11). When, therefore, we find 
in books like Enoch, the Assumptio Mosis, and 
4 Ezr, disclosures of the secrets of nature and of 
historj', lists of angels, descriptions of heaven and 
hell, and of the experiences of the soul after death, 
beside other Essenic marks, such as the praise of 
asceticism and the unfavourable estimate of the 
second temple, the opinion seems not unfounded 
that ' their secret literature was perhaps in no 
small degree made use of in the Pseudepigrapha, 
and has through them been indirectly handed 
down to us' (Wellhausen). To attribute the 
apocalyptical literature exclusively to Essenism, 
however, as Jewish scholars wish to do, is without 
historical justification. It is true that a rela- 
tionship of Essenism with Zoroastrianism is prob- 
able (Lightfoot, Colossians ; Cheyne, Expository 
Times, ii. 2C>-2-8, 248-53 ; BamptonLect. pp. 417-21, 
445 - 49) ; and Zoroastrianism treasured secret 
books, some of which certain Christian Gnostics 
claimed to possess. It is probable also that the 
foreign (heathen) character of these books was felt 
by many, since Judaism never gave these books 
official sanction ; and no apocalypse after Dn was 
preserved in Hebrew. Nevertheless, the foreign 
elements here dominant reach far back into OT 
literature ; and, on the other hand, Essenism was 
much more closely related to Pharisaism than to 
Zoroastrianism, being, in the first place, 'only 
Pharisaism in the superlative' (Schiirer). If the 
Essenes are to be understood historically as simply 
more consistent protestants against the high- 

friesthood of the Maccalxean princes than the 
'harisees, — carrying their protest to the point of 
refusing all participation in the temple service, — 
then in the Hasidaeans of 1 Mac 2^ 7'^- we have 
the roots of both Pharisaism and Essenism, and 
the Book of Dn would stand near the beginning 
of each. The Messianic hope is the genuinely 
Jewish element in the apocalypses. That this had 
a far larger place in the mind of the Pharisee 
during the two centuries preceding the destruction 
of Jerus. than it had after that event, — and esp. 
after Akiba's death, — is evident to all but Jewish 
scholars, who are apt to judge of the whole post- 
exilic period by the Talmud. The apocalyptical 
literature in question was, then, in all probability 
valued and cultivated bj' Pharisees, certainly by 
some circles of Pharisees, as well as by Essenes. 
Indeed, in spite of its rejection by rabbinical 
Judai-sm, germs of it survived, and afterwards 
came to new life, in the late Jewish Kabbala, or 
secret philosophy {12th cent.). 

It is a striking fact that while official Judaism 
rejected these hidden books, and declared for the 
exclusive recognition of the 24 books of the 
Canon, it yet proceeded to claim for itself the 

Jossession of an oral law which Moses delivered to 
oshna when he gave the Pent, openly to Israel, and 
which passed on through the hands of the elders, 
the prophets, the men of the Great Synagogue, to 
an unbroken succession of scribes (Pirke Aboth), 
until it came to writing in the Mishna, and then 
in the Talmud. By the theory of a secret tradition 
the scribes sought to give their law the authority 
of Moses, and yet account for its late appearance. 

2. The Words 'Gexuzim' and ' Hizoxim.' — 
The designation of these hidden books in Heb. 
we do not know. A Heb. synonym for dro/cpi'^ 
is c" •:■ ; but this word and the verb i:i are used 
in the Talm., not of the secret books just described, 
but usually of a hiding, by the authorities, of 
books judged unfit for public use. A possible 
exctj.tion is the reported 'hiding' by Hezekiah of 
a Ijook of medical lore, in order that the sick 
might call rather upon God (Mishna Pesach iv. 9). 
But it was commonly used with reference to some 
voi^ T. — 8 

book of the Canon. Thus a worn-out roll of a 
sacred scripture was ' hidden,' perhaps because, 
though unfitted for use in the synagogue, it was 
yet sacred and not to be destroyed (Mishna Sabb. 
IX. 6 ; Sanh. x. 6). But the word was commonly 
used in reference to the question whether some 
book should be withdrawn from the class of 
sacred Scriptures. Thus there were Rabbis who 
wished to 'hide' Pr, because of its contradic- 
tions ; Ca, because of its secular character ; Ec, 
because of its heresies. But the objections were 
in every instance met. The case of Est was more 
serious, and it is not improbable that it was put in 
the class of genuzim for a time among certain 
circles, though we have only the evidence of some 
Christian lists of the Canon, which claim (or seem) 
to foUow the instructions of Jews (esp. Melito. See 

If there existed at any time a class of books 
called genuzim, the Talmudic use of the word 
would lead us to expect that it would contain 
the books nearest to the Canon in authority or 
common esteem : books which once stood within 
the circle of sacred writings, or made a fair claim 
to stand there ; in other words, books like the 
antilegomena of early Christian use. If there were 
such a class. Sir and 1 Mac, if not To and Jth, 
should stand in it ; but the word is never applied 
to these books in extant writings. This is not, in- 
deed, a proof that it was not so used ; and the testi- 
mony of Origen suggests that it was. He says 
that the Jews had hidden Sus and other books 
from the people, while Jth and To, they had told 
him, they did not possess even among their hidden 
books, or apocrypha {Ep. ad Afric. ). 

For writings that stood wholly outside of the 
circle of sacred books, esp. for the books of heretics 
such as the Samaritans, the Sadducees, and Chris- 
tians (n-r? "!??), the Rabbis had another name, 
hizonim {oririr, cr%z), lit. 'external' or 'outside' 
books. The danger to Judaism of the reading of 
these books led Akiba, who had himself been 
attracted by them, to prohibit their use. ' Who- 
ever reads in the sepnarim hizonim has no part 
in the world to come. Books, on the other hand, 
like Sir and other such, which were composed 
after the age of the prophets had been closed, may 
be read just as one reads a letter.'* Sir, then, 
and other such books, are not hizonim in Akiba's 
^•iew, the correctness of which is evident from the 
free use of Sir by Rabbis in Pal. for a century and 
a half after Akiba, and in Babylon still later. 
But it appears that the maintenance of a middle 
class of books between sacred and profane involved 
dangers, and it vjas finally decided that ' he who 
reads a verse which is not out of the 24 
books of sacred scripture, his offence is as if he 
had read in the sepharim h^izonim' (Midr. r. 
Num. § 14, and at Koheleth 12^-, cf. Jer. Sabb. 16). 
It is possible that this practical transfer of books 
like Sir into the class of hizonim may have ob- 
scured the evidence of their having once been in 
the class oi genuzim. 

3. The Hidden Books of Christianity and 
THE Word 'Apocrypha.'— Christianity was at its 
beginning, even less than Judaism, a religion of 
mysteries, to be hidden by the few from the many. 
Christ's words in Lk 1(F, Mt 11» ('hidden' 
from the wise, revealed to babes), were a direct 
contradiction of esoteric religion. If there are 
apocrypha, hidden things, they are to be made 
knowii (Mk 4-s, Lk 8'^ cf. Mt 13'-). 

In Christ the hidden wisdom of God had become 
manifest, and the mysteries of the coming of His 

♦ For this rendering by Graetz of a cormpt text (Sanh. x. 1, 
and the Bab. and Jer. Talm.), see Buhl, Canon and Text of OT, 
p. 8 ; and cf. Hamburger, Real-Eneye. ii. 68 ff. The Jer. Tahn. 
gives Sirach as an illustration of the hizonim. 




kingdom were disclosed by its realisation. Yet 
this faith gained a slow and hard victory. In two 
ways the love of mysteries and of the books that 
contained them was fostered. 

(a) The Christian religion made its start in the 
Jewish world in close connexion with the Messianic 
ideas as they had been developed, esp. in the apoca- 
lypses, from I)n onwards. Jewisl) Christians clung 
to the Jewish apocalyptic literature, modifying 
indeed its references to the person of the Messiah, 
making room for His earthly life and death, but 
feeling the less need of radical changes because the 
proper fulfilment of the Messianic hopes was con- 
nected, not with the first, but with the second 
coming of Christ. This led, naturally, less to the 
production of new Christian revelations than to 
the keeping and Cliristian editing of the old. 
Jewish patriarchs and prophets were in this way 
made to testify to the truth, and to forecast the 
future, of Christianity. Thus the liook of Enoch 
and the Apoc. of E/ra were used as authentic 
revelations by many Church Fathers. Jewish 
apocalypses oi Abrafiam, Moses, Elijah, Is, Jer, 
Baruch, and others in great numbers, in part 
extant, but chieHy known to us only by name, 
were treasured by early Christianity. 

Even when apocalypses in the names of Christian 
apostles were put forth, their material was of 
necessity largely traditional and Jewish in origin. 

These books, then, Jewish and Christian, are the 
earliest apocri/pha of Christianity (cf. the lists 
below). They are books usually put forth as 
having been hidden (the pseudejfigraphic form), 
and always contain accounts or hidden things 
miraculously disclosed. In the latter sense even 
the Apoc. of St. John is called 'a*'' by Gregory of 
Nyssa {Or. de Ordin. ii. 44) and by Epiphanius 
(U(Kr. 51). The cultivation of such 'hidden' 
books by no means belonged at first to heretical 
sects, but was characteristic of early Christianity 
in general. It was opposed chiefly by those who 
fell under Gr. influence ; but among thera another 
sort of mystery took the place of the Jewish 
apocalyptic, namely, the Gr. gnosis. 

(b) As Jewish Christians made Christianity less 
the fulfilment than the reaffirmation of Jewish 
hopes, so Hel. Christians made it less the solution 
of the mystery of existence than a new, supreme 
mystery. Christ was made the central figure — in 
one case in Jewish eschatology, in the other m Greek 

St. Paul's language in 1 Co 1 and 2 discloses the 
existence in Corinth of those who valued a hidden 
wi.sdom more than his gospel of the crucified Christ. 
And later, at Colossai, St. Paul urges, against an 
essentially Gnostic tendency, as the word of God, 
' the mystery which hath been hidden from the 
ages and from the generations, but now hath been 
manifested to his saints' (1'"*). The mystery of 
God is ' Christ, in whom are all the treasures of 
wisdom and knowledge hidden ' {dir6Kpv<poi, 2^). The 
special Colossian gnosis, with its worship of angels, 
its a.sceticism, its visions, and its secret doctrines, 
reminds us of Essenism. The strongest influence 
on the development of a secret Christian gnosis 
came, however, from Alexandria : Gnosticism ueing 
indeed ' nothing but a Christian Hellenism ' (Har- 

As the Jewish Apocalypse fumi-shed one way of 
connecting the new faith with the old, Hel. 
allegorical interpretation supplied another ready 
means of finding Christ and Christianity in the 
OT ; thus making of it, as Philo did, a hidden book. 
But the aliegori(!al method was capable of a further The Gr. Christian was less concerned to find 
Christianity in the OT tlian to find Gr. philosophy 
in Chri.stianity. It was not an unnatural ettort, 
after St. Paul, and in apparent connexion with him, 

to set the OT wholly aside, and to apjdy allegory 
to the person and history of Christ. Gnosticism, 
indeed, based and pusiied its claims on the ground 
of apostolic authority, and, with its rejection of 
the OT, it was even the first to feel the need of 
nevr authoritative scriptures. But it established 
its position (1) by requiring an allegorical inter- 
pretation of the conimonij' received apostolic 
writings, making them books of hidden import; 
(2) by claiming to possess, besides the open ajK)8- 
tolic writings, a secret ai)ostolic tradition (Basilides 
and Valentinus claim to derive their secret gno-sis 
from puj)ils of St. Paul ; the Ophites, from a pupil 
of St. James, etc.) ; (3) by the production of great 
numbers of books, chiefly gospels and acts of the 
various ajjostles ; * (4) by the claim (like that of 
Hel. Judaism) to immediate prophetic inspiration, 
so that prophets and ai>ocalypses played in some 
Gnostic communities an important part, though few 
traces of Gnostic apocalypses remain. 

Hel. Gnosticism stands as the extreme con- 
trast to the Jewish apocalyptic tendency. It re- 
nounced the OT on which the Ai)Ocalypse rests, 
and rejected the coming of Christ, the resurrection, 
and the earthly kingdom, in which the A[>oc. 
centres. Yet both make of Christianity a mystery, 
and claim for the books that unfold the mystery 
especial sanctity. From these two sources came 
multitudes of a"' books into Christian use. They 
were called A. by those who valued them, for the 
word contained no necessary disparagement, but 
described the character of the books ; and they 
were by no means condemned at the outset as 
heretical. The Book of Enoch is directly cited by 
Jude (vv.'^'^"), who also uses the Assumption of 
Moses (v.^). From such books may have come 
other citations and references which are not found 
in known books (see Origen's view below). The 
Book of Enoch was used as a genuine and sacred 
book by the Ep. Barnabas, Irenieus, Tertullian, 
and Clement of Alex. Tertullian says, indeed, 
that it was not received by some Christians. He, 
however, defends its reception {i.e. among the 
books of sacred Scripture) by appealing to Jude; 
and explains its absence from the Heb. scrii)tures 
by saying that the Jews rejected it, as they did 
other books, because it spoke of Christ, — an 
exj)lanation not, indeed, wholly unhistorical. 

Clement of Alex, uses Ass. Mos. and 4 Ezr, and 
also many other prophetic A. unknown to us. 
He was a warm defender of the value of secret 
traditions, and used not only Jewish, and even 
heathen, but Christian secret books. He believed 
in a secret tradition entrusted by Christ to His 
disciples, and valued it highly {Strum, i. 11. 13. 14 ; 
V. 60-4). Some of these traditions were preserved 
in secret books, among which he cites certain a*" 
gospels and acts. Though he knows that heretics 
make a bad use of such books {Strain, iii. 29), yet 
his view of ^. as a whole is extremely favourable. 
Origen is more discriminating. He finds a use for 
A. m NT interpretation. In 1 Co 2«, 2 Ti 3«, 
He n^, Mt 23*5-37 27" he finds references to a.*^ 
books, and says that 'not all A. current in the 
name of holy men are to be received on account of 
the Jews, since they perhaps invented some for the 
destruction of our true Scriptures and the confirma- 
tion of false doctrines ; but not all are to be re- 
jected, since some pertain to the demonstration of 
our Scriptures' (Comment, on Mt 23**). Origen 
seems, however, to have been influenced in his use 
of the word by the Jewish gcnuzim, for in iiis Epist. 
ad Afric. he speaks of Sua as mmle a"' by 
Jewish autliorities, though the Christian Churcn 
did not so regard it. Jth and To, he says, 
the Jews do not possess even among their A. 

* See Lipsius in Smith and Waco, Diet. <tf Chrutian Biog., 
arts. 'Gospels' and ' Acts o( Apostles.' 




These books ai-e not ' secret ' in the i>roper sense, 
jind can be called A. only in the sense of being 
withdrawn from publicity, and so from canonicity. 

The defence of A. proper became more and more a mark of 
beresj-. Even Origen in PrtH. in Cant, ar^es for their ex- 
clusion, because of the corrupt traditions, contrary to true faith, 
which they contain. They were long current in Gr., but 
found no permanent place in the LXA, though the Oriental 
V8S received some of them, and one became current in Lat., 
though Vulg did not give it recognition (4 Ezr). 

PhUatUr of Brescia (on Heresies, e. 383-391 a.d.) condemns 
the 'heresy which accepts only A., i.e. secrets of prophets and 
apostles, not can. scriptures' ; but be would allow .i. to be read 
' for the sake of manners by the perfect,' not in the church, and 
not by aU. 

Prticiiliantu (tract iii.) argnes, from the generally accepted 
account of the restoration of the can. books by £>ra in 4 Ezr 14, 
for the value of the TO secret books also, including 4 Ezr 
itself. Epiphaniut also justifies by the same reference the 
use of various a^ books, which he thuiks were translated by the 
Seventy in addition to the canonical. 

The conviction, however, grradually prevailed that the cultiva- 
tion of secret books was danigerous, both because of the errors 
they contained and because of the sectarianism they fostered. 
There could be no Catholic Church so long as sects could claim 
to possess either new revelations or a secret apostolic tradition. 

Secret doctrines and books were cut off by the two principles, 
that valid inspiration was limited to the apostolic age, and that 
only the books generally received in the churches were genuinely 
apostolic. No doubt a sense of the unchristian ch^-acter of 
the books in question worked, together with the growing con- 
t-iction that their possession was uncatholic, to bring about 
their condemnation. The g^radually prevaiUng C^thoUc prin- 
ciple {quod ubiqiu, quod temper, quod ab amnibui) would give 
to the very word apocryphu* the meanings: false, spurious, 

The principle that only what the churches generally receive 
is apostolic is found in the Muiatorian Fragment (2nd cent.). 
Jrenceui stands early in the line of this growing Catholicism. 
He opposes the theory, which Clem. Alex, defentk, of the 
existence and value of secret traditions (ii. 27. 2, iii. 2. 1, 3. 1, 
14. 2, 15. 1), and condemns the 'countless multitude of aM 
and spurious writings' which the Marcosians, appealing to 
Dn 12i», claim to possess, but which they really fabricate for 
themselves. Hegenppiu also speaks of 'the so-called A.' (i.e. 
so called by the heretics themselves), and says that 'some 
of them were written in his own time by certain heretics' (Eus. 
HE iv. 22. 8). Tertuilian charges the heretics with adding to 
Scripture ' secrets ot A., blasphemous fables ' {Reiur. Camis 63) ; 
and writes a vigorous polemic against the Gnostic claim to 
possess a secret tradition {prceser. ^-27). He applies the word 
apocryphiu to an apoc which he regards as spurious (Shepherd), 
but not to Enoch, which he (as well as Irenseus) regards as 
g-enuine (d« pudxe. 10, de anima, 2). Ci/ril of Jerus., in his 
Gatechetics (iv. 33-6, ab. 348 A.D.), uses the word of aU 
Jewish books except the 22 wiiich are openly read in the 
churches. Cyril's insistence that the A., t.e. the books not 
read in the churches, are not to be read even in private, is 
evidently aimed against the distinction of three classes of books 
— those "read in church, those read privately, and those wholly 
rejected. This distinction is as old as the Muratorian Fragment, 
which puts the Shepherd in such a middle class. It is implied 
by Origen, in his discrimination among A. It is definitely 
formulated by Athana*iiM, who, in his 3s)th Easter Letter 
(367 A.D.), gives the name A. only to the third class of books 
written by heretics as pleased tlieir fancy, and put forth as 
old, to lead astray the simple. Athanasius gives no list of 
these A., but later lists teach us the current tmderstanding 
of the word. 

The Chronography of yicephortu (patriarch of Constantinople 
806-815), in a revised form which originated in Jerus. about 8o0, 
contains a stichometric list of Biblical books which has inner 
marks of a much earlier date (Zahn, 'perhaps before 500'). It 
contains (1) the can. books of OT and of NT ; (2) the antile- 
gomena of OT and of NT ; (3) ..1. of OT and of NT. Under 
the last heading the following list is given : — Apoaypha of 
OT : (1) Enoch, (2) Patriarchs, (3) Prayer of Joseph, (4) Testa- 
ment of Moses, (5) Assumption of Uoses, (6) Abram, (7) Eldad 
and Modad, (8) EUijah, the prophet, (9) Zephaniah, the prophet, 
(10) Zachariah, father of John, [11] Pseudepigrapha of Baruch, 
Habakkuk, Ezekiel, and Daniel. Apoerj/pha of NT : (I) Itinerary 
of Paul, (2) Itin. of Peter, (3) Itin. of John, (4) Itin. of Thomas, 
(5) Gospel according to Thomas, (6) Teaching of the Apostles, 
(7, 8) Clement's [two Epistles], (9) [Epistles] of Ignatius, of 
Polycarp, and of Hermas. 

Of the A. of OT, Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 are, in whole or in part, 
extant ; Nos. 3, 7, 8, 9 are cited as genuine ' by Origen or some 
BtiU older Church Father.' They are all Jewish apocalypses, 
t,e. A. in the earliest sense, but the word now carries an 
adverse judgment. This list is repeated in the so-called 
Sjfnopti* of Athana»ius. Similar, but in some degree inde- 
pendent, is the summary of ^ . in the anonjTnous ' Liit of iixty ' 
can. books, which may represent the views of the Eastern 
Church in the 7th cent. After the can. books follows the 
intermediate class of ' tho»e vutside of the tixty ' ; and then 
• apocrypha ' as follows : — (1) .\dam, (2) E^och. (3) Lamech, (4) 
Patriarchs, (5) Prayer of Joseph (6) EHdad and Modad, (7) Testa- 
ment of Moses, fS) -Assumption of Moses, (9) Psalms of Solomon, 
(10) Apoc, of HUijah, (11) Vision of Isuah, (12) Apoc. of Zeph- 

aniah, (13) Apoc. of Zachariah, (14) Apoc of Ezra, (15) History of 
James, (16) Apoc. of Peter, (17) Itinerary and Teachings of the 
AposUes, (18) Epistle of Barnabas, (19) Acta of Paul, (20) Apoc 
of Paul, (21) Didascalia of Clement, (22) Didascalia of Ignatius, 
(23) Didascalia of Polycaip, (24) Oimptl ace to Baniatos, (25) 
Gospel ace to Matthew. 

With reference to these lists, it is to be noticed that they 
contain in general just those books, Jewish and Christian, 
which were put forth in the first place as A. in the proper 
sense. Not the application but the interpretation of the word 
is changed, in accordance with a changed estimate of the books. 
Once vSued by some as even super-can., they are now set apart 
not only from the Canon, but from the class of books that are 
good for private reading. Nevertheless, they still stand In a 
recognised class by themselves under the old title Apocrypha, 
and are distinct not only from secular or heathen books, but 
from later heretical literature. The great part they played in 
early CThurch history has so much recognition. 

The Latin Church was further removed from the 
traditional use of the word, and it is not strange 
that we find there various novelties in its applica- 
tion. The greatest extension of its use is found in 
the Deerettim Gelasii, which presents a list of Bibl. 
books that may be regarded as that of the Rom. 
Synod of 382, under Damasus. After lists of OT 
and NT, and a list of patristic works approved by 
the Church, follows, under the heading Notitia 
librorum apocryphoi-um qui non recipiuntur, a list 
of some 60 titles. Only NT A. are given, and to 
these are added (perhaps in later re\Tsions of the 
work) a miscellaneous collection of books con- 
demned by the Church, including even the works 
of Eusebius, Tertuilian, Clement of Alex., etc., to 
each of which, as to the earlier list, the adjective 
apocryphus is added. 

Almost equally novel in Christian usage is 
Jermnes extension of the word in the op|>osite 
direction to cover the books of our A., tiiough 
this rests upon Heb. usage, as we know it from 
Origen. * Quidquid extra hos [the 22 books of 
Heb. Can.] est, inter dr6Kpv<f>a esse ponenduui' 
(Prologus Galeatus). Jerome, in practice, how- 
ever, gives to our A. an intermediate position (.see 
below), in substantial harmony with Rujinus, who 
attempted to introduce the Eastern threefold divi- 
sion into the West, and gave the name apocrypha 
to the third class. 

The Western Church, however, did not adopt 
the threefold division. Against Jerome's theory, 
it included the second di\'ision in the first. Neither 
did it extend the word apocrypha to heretical books 
in general, but retained practically its ori^nal 
application. Another Western novelty, how- 
ever, maintained itself through the middle ages, 
namely, the interpretation of the word apocryphus 
as meaning obscurity of origin or authorsliip. 
According to Augustine, the A. were so called 
' because their obscure origin w"as not clear to the 
Fathers' {de Civ. Dei, xv. 23), and he opposes this 
explanation to the idea of heretics, that they ' are 
to be held in a certain secret authority' (c. Faust, 
xi. 2). This brought confusion, for the word had 
come to mean practically non-can., but obscurity of 
origin was not a corresix)nding conception. So, 
during the middle ages, it was variously modified 
by extending the idea of obscurity or uncertainty 
from the authorship to the truth of a book, or to 
its reception by common consent of the Church. 
Jth, a" in the sense that its author is un- 
known, was received (can.) because its truth is 
evident (Hugo de St. Caro, 1240). Job, a»' in the 
same sense, is in the Canon because not uncertainly 
confirmed bvthe authority of the Church (Hugo de 
St. Victore.'d. 1141). 

The usage of Protestantism is prepared by 
Carlstadt in his De canonicis scriptuns, 1520. He 
reWews the opinions of Augustine and Jerome, and 
sides with the latter in respect both to the inter- 
pretation of the word and its application to our 
A. Not uncertainty of authorship, but simply 
non-canonicity, is the meaning of the word apocry- 




pfial. He applies the word to the books of our A. 
as an adjective, not as a title. Throujih Protestant 
edd. of tlie Bible, beginning Avith Luther, the word 
came, by a natural misunderstanding, to be re- 
garded as the title of this particular collection, 
and the word ' pseudepigraplia ' was used of the 
A. proper, whicn neither Jerome, Carlstadt, nor 
Luther thought of depriving of their old name. 

On the other hand, the name 'Apocrypha,' to 
which a bad sense adhered, contributed to a gradu- 
ally diminishing regard for the lM)oks now so called. 

Vonclmions. — (1) The word npovryphnl was used 
before the Reformation quite consistently of a 
certain of books, namely, the Jewish and 
Jewish - Christian Apocalypses, which we call 
Pseudepigrapha, and the Apocrypha of the NT, 
still so called, made up largely of the books of 
Gnostic and other sects. These are properly secret 
or hidden books in their formal claim and in their 
contents, if not ori<,'inaily in their actual use. 

(2) Jewish liabbis apillied a synonymous word, 
gennzbn, to books ' hiaden,' i.e. withdrawn and 
withheld from public (synagogue) use by the 
Jewish authorities, and so made uncanonical. 
This 'hiding' (the verb is used more often than 
the adjective) might happen to books in no sense 
of hidden origin or meaning. Through Origen and 
Jerome, the Jewish word seems to have had some 
influence upon the Christian. 

(3) The Catholic Church, however, did not first 
make books a"' by excluding them from the Canon 
(the verb is not used), but it decided that the 
A. already existing under that name were not to 
be regarded as sacred scriptures, since publicity and 
universality were marks of genuineness and truth. 
The secret books of sects were, as such, spurious 
and false. 

(4) It was therefore easy to forget that ^4. was 
the original name of these books, and to regard 
it as expressing the judgment of the Church concern- 
ing them. Those Iwoks were hidden which belonged 
to sects, which lacked common, open usage by 
the Church. A"' meant, not received by the Church. 
But since books which the Church received were 
thereby proved apostolic, a non - apostolic and 
obscure origin was a mark of A. 

(5) Protestantism went over to the Jewish usage, 
applying the M'ord to the books withdraAvn by it 
from the commonly accepted Canon, though this 
no longer meant withdrawn from public reading and 
common use, but only from full authority for 
doctrine. Protestants thus came to apply the word 
to books used with the canon in church service, not 
disapproved but recommended as good and useful, 
not secret or hidden in origin, meaning, or use. 
The evil name, however, helped to lower the first 
estimate of the l>ooks. 

Origin of the Coli.ection.— In order to under- 
stand the origin and historical sigwi^cance of the 
collection of books which we call/the A., it is 
neces-sary to survey the work of th«f Jewish .scribe, 
for in tne scribe the literary histpry of Judaism 

{n) The Work of the Jevrish Scribes. — This can, in 
a general way, be divided into (A) the collecting 
and editing of the sacred books, (B) the production 
of new books. The transition between the two 
was made by the tr. or paraphrasing, and the 
interpretation of t he sacred booKs, More particu- 
larly, (A) the scribes collected and edited (1) the 
Law ; (2) the Prophets, 'former' and 'latter' ; (3) the 
rest of the religious literature of tlie nation, the so- 
called Hagiographa. (B 1) In connexion with this 
3rd Canon, which contains some independent work 
of the scribes, the production of other books of 
similar character was encourage<l {e.g. the A.): 
(2) with the Maccalxean crisis came a revival of 

prophecy, and the production of books interpreting 
and imitating those of the 2nd Canon (a[K>calypses, 
or apocryphci proper) ; (3) the interpretation or the 
1st Canon, the Law, always a chief task of the 
scribes, was especially stimulated after the de- 
struction of Jerus., and resulted in the Mishna 
and Talmud. 

The synagogue was the centre of the scribe's 
literary activity ; and the centre of the synagogue 
.service was the Law. The relii^ious instruction of 
the people in the religion of the law was his aim. 
His collection of other sacred books was for the 
sake of their public reading in the synagogue 
service, in exposition and enforcement of the I^w. 
Such public reading was the mark and meaning of 
canonicity. The translations (Targumim) and 
commentaries (Midrashim) that accompanied the 
reading were for the same end, the religious teach- 
ing of the community, and were free and oral 
before they were fixed in writing. 

The order of the independent work of the scribes 
sketched above (B) reverses the order of their work 
as editors (A). This sequence is not to l)e over- 
pressed. The editing of the scribes involved, especi- 
ally at first, independent work, in the way of com- 
ment as well as selection and arrangement ; on the 
other hand, their independent writing was always 
based on tradition. Perhaps in the case of none 
of the books of the scribes have we original works 
in the proper sense. The stories of haggadists and 
the visions of seers are revisions and elaborations 
of traditional material. Further, the three lines 
of independent work outlined existed side by side, 
and the order given is only that of the first preval- 
ence of each kind of work. Gr. influence favoured I 
the first, the Maccaba'an reaction the second, andf 
the fall of the nation the third. Of the products! 
of the first kind, some gained admission into the 
3rd Canon (Hagiographa), and so became the com- 
mon property of Pal. and Alex. Judaism and Chris- 
tianity. But as they were especially congenial 
to Jews who fell most under Gr. inttuence, some 
of them were preserved, others contributed, by 
Alex. Jews. So far as they gained a place in the 
Gr. Bible, these, too, passed over to Christianity 
(the A.). Products of tiie 2nd class we have con- 
sidered under i. 1. Writings of the first ami 
second kinds are called by Jews Haggada, while 
the third, the elaboration and definition of the 
Law, is called Halacha. The A., then, are to be 
vieM'ed in close connexion, on the one side, with 
the Hagiographa, and, on the other, with later 
developments of the Jewish Haggada. 

{b) The Apocrifpha in relation to the Hagio- 
fjrapha. — That the three divisions of the Jewish 
Canon (compare the list at the beginning' of this 
article) represent three successive collections, 
widely separated in time, and that they stood 
originally, in the Jewish view, in a decreasing 
order of authority and importance, are ascertained 
facts in the history of OT Canon. The Hagio- 
grapha is, then, a relatively late collection of 
books on the whole late in origin, and, according 
to the Jewish view, inferior in authority to Law 
and Prophets. The order of books composing it 
is variously given, and the limits of the collection 
were open to dispute long after the Law and 
Prophets were closed. In regard to Ca, Ec, 
and Est, there were still differences of opinion up 
to the time of Akiba (c. 110-135 A.D.). 

The Bk of Ps owes its place here to the fact that 
its use was in the temple, not in the synagogue. 
Apart from Ps and La, the Hagiographa consists 
of (1) hi.story, in continuation of that told in Kings 
■(F>zr-Neh); (2) history retold with a view to 
instruction (Ch)* ; (3) stories, based on history 

• In the Midrashic treatment, of history, Ch follows still 
older attempte (see 2 Ch 2*27 1322). 




or tratlitioii, told to illustrate religious truth (Ru, 
E?t. <'a Vt, Dri). In Job the transition is made 
fioiii stuiv to (4) ethical and philosophical books 
(Pr. Ee). ' 

Under similar headings fall the contents of 
the A. (1) History proi)er is found in 1 Mac. (2) 
History and story are retold vith edifying em- 
bellishments. 1 Es is made np of extracts from 
2 Ch (35. 36), Ezr, and Neh, with an additional 
storj- of the wisdom of Zorobabel [S-o*^). This 
MidVash perhai>s preceded the literal tr. of Ch, 
Ezr. Neh. into (yree k. Such an Haggadic addition 
to history was I'r. Man i suggested by 2 Ch 33^^ ^). 
Est appears in the LXX only in the form of a 
midrash, in which, among other things, are supplied 
the letter referred to in 3^*, prayers of Mordecai 
and Esther at 4^", the decree mentioned in 8^-. 
Dn is similarly enlarged by a prayer and song 
at 3^, and the new stories of Damel's wisdom, Sus 
and Bel. Even the late Mac^baean history is 
d in the Haggadic way in 2 Mac, an epitome 
! rger work by Jason of Cyxene, which adorns 
tile History with legendary elements to make of it 
a sermon on the Pharisaic religion. 3 and 4 Mac 
are found usually in the LXX, though not in the 
A. 3 Mac is a jioot example of moralising under 
the form of histoiy ; and 4 Mac makes an incident 
in the MaceaLiean story the text for a philosophical 
treatise on the lordship of the religious reason 
over the passions. (3) Of new stories the A. 
contains two famous examples, To and Jth ; 
Tobit teaching the reward for the individual of 
a faithful life of Pharisaic righteousness ; Judith 
connecting a patriotism like Esther's A^-ith regard 
for a ceremonially correct life. (4) Direct moral 
and religious instruction ('ethical Haggada') is 
represented by Sir and Wis, the one a Pal. con- 
tinuation, the other a Hel. development of the 
earlier wisdom books. As in the Hagiographa one 
book, Dn, makes the transition from story to 
prophecy, so in the A., Bar and the Ep. of 
Jertmy are prophetic in character. It is not, 
however, with prophecy nor with law, but with 
history and story, that both Hagiographa and A. 
have chiefly to do (cf. the use made of Dn by 
Hellenists [LXX] and by later Palestinians [Enoch, 
etc.]. The line between history and story is in 
both an uncertain one, as history, too. is told for 
religious, not for scientific purposes. ^Vith stories 
and with proverbial sayings the Jewish Rabbis 
long continued to occupy themselves. The value of 
these forms of religious instruction no one will 
question in view of the gospels. As to the relative 
worth of their use in the Hagiographa and the A., 
a fair judgment, apart from doctrinal considera- 
tions, will strongly justify the choice of the Pales- 
tinians, taking the two collections as wholes. A 
relation between them is, however, not to be 
denied, and is grotinded in their history. 

(c) Palestinian and Hellenistic El':in''nts in the 
Apocnjphri. — The a*' books of the LXX were in 
part translations of Pal. (Heb.) books, in part 
original waitings of Greek Jews : but it is not 
possible to draw the line between the two with 
security. As the LXX was recognised as a tr. , one 
would expect that translations would more readily 
find their way into it. Yet the Hel. scribes 
were busy writers, especially in the lines which 
the A. follows (history, story, wisdom). *^-'- 
contains its own testimony that i: Mas writt* 
Heb. and tr. by the writers grandson into Gr 
1 Mac was undoubtedly a Heb. book, and Jerome 
(if not Origen) knew it in the original. Jth and 
To, Jerome knew in ' Chaldee." and a Heb. original 
is almost certain. The Ad. Est may be Heb.. or 
at least similar additions may have arisen in Pal. 
in connexion with the yearly celebration of Purim. 
Pr. Man niav have been Heb., and even 1 Es. if it 

preceded the LXX 2 Es [Ezr-Ntli], may have 
had a Heb. precursor. Oi the Ad. lin, .Sus 
turns on a Gr. play on words. \Ms and 2, 3, and 
4 Mao %\ f re L-ertainly Greek. 

2. HK Apocrypha and its kelatiox 

TO 1 -V. — [a) In Hellenistic Judaism. — 

The a"^ bookjs are found in all MSS of the LXX, 
scattered among the books of the Heb. Canon 
without discrimination. These MSS are, indeed, 
all of Christian origin, and some of them even 
contain Christian songs ; but, apart from these, they 
undoubtedly represent the OT which was current 
among the Gr. Jews and used in Gr. synagogues 
in the apostolic and early post-apostolic age. 
The additions to the Heb. Canon are not only of 
Jewish origin, but are, as a whole, books which 
would interest Gr. Jews, but would not specially 
interest Christians, since the prophetic element in 
them is conspicuously small. The addition of 
these books by Christians would be inexplicable. 
The presen-ation of this longer OT by Christians 
ordy, is naturally explained by the fact that 
soon after 70 A.D. Hel. Judaism in the distinct 
sense ceased to exist, giving place either to 
rabbinical Judaism or to Christianity; so that 
the earlier diHerence regarding the limits of 
sacred Scriptures between Pal. and Alex. Jews 
survived only as a difference between Jews and 

We must not, however, conclude that the A. 
had been in the strict sense canonized by Alex. 
Judaism. Their place among Scriptures is rather 
due, in part, to the supreme dignity of the Law ; in 
part to the broad view of inspiration current 
among Hellenists. In a more exclusive way 
than in later Pal. Judaism, the Pent, was to 
Alexandrians the sacred Scripture, the Canon by 
pre-eminence. It was such to Philo. In this 
respect the Alexandrians perhaps remained at the 
standpoint of the earlier Palestinians of the 3rd 
and 2nd centuries B.C. When Alex. Judaism was 
founded, the Law was the Canon of Judaism. 
The work of the 70 concerned it alone (Aristeas). 
The tr. of the other books into Greek in Egypt went 
on, in part, side by side with the formation of the 
2nd and 3rd Canons in Pal. That the suc- 
ceeding translators disregarded the Pal. distinc- 
tion of Prophets and Hagiographa, and arranged 
the Itooks, after the Law, topically, though in 
no fixed order, indicates their different view of 
these books. The relatively freer tr. points in the 
same direction ; and this freedom passes over by 
natural degrees into the incorporation of explana- 
tory and illustrative additions of less or greater 
extent. For this procedure the Pal. translators 
of OT into Aram. tTargumim) had perhaps already 
set the example. That, finally, Sir and Wis should 
be put in connexion with the Solomonic books, 
making, with Ps and Job, a volume of poetry, 
or that, in connexion with Est, Jth and To should 
be inserted, cannot seem strange. This was made 
easier by the Hel. view of inspiration. While 
Palestinians inclined to limit inspiration to the 
age of the prophets, long endeil, the Alexandrians 
re_'arded the di>"ine spirit as still active, and riewed 
as inspiration the experience of the thmker and 
^^"riter in moments of special clearness of insight 
and exaltation of feeling. 

Acainst the evidence that the LXX contained 
ooks, Philos silence is inconclusive. Philo's 
: is the Pent. It is true that he cites none of 
the A., but in the prophetic Canon he passes by 
Ezk and all the minor prophets except Hos and 
Zee ; and of the Hagiographa, except Ps, he makes 
almost no use, citing Pr twice, Job and Ch once, 
and Dn and the five Megilloth not at all. 

(h) In Palestinian Judaism. — Here, too, the Law, 
long the only Canon, remained supreme. The 




Jewish scribes regarded the prophets as those who 

fjave an authoritative interpretation of t!ie Law, 
landing on the Mosaic tradition from the elders to 
the scribes. The Law has always had the chief 
place in the synagogue service, the prophets an 
important secondary place, the IIagiograi)ha a 
place altogether subordinate. For a long time 
these dilierent collections could not be written on 
the same roll. As they did not form one volume, 
it was the easier to keep them distinct in use and 
estimation. The books of the 2nd and 3rd Canons 
were, however, according to the Jewish view, 
inspired, and this in the end distinguished them 
from all later books. Jos. (c. Ap. i. 8) says that 
the pronhets ' learned the earliest and most ancient 
events Ly inspiration of God, and wrote down the 
events of their own times plainly, as they 
occurred.' ' But from Artaxerxes [Est] to our 
times all events have indeed been written down ; 
but these late books are not deemed worthy of the 
same credit, because the exact succession of the 
prophets was wanting.' By the use of the formal 
principle that with ftfalachi prophecy ceased (cf. 
Mai #•«, Zee 13^ 1 Mac 4^" O-^ 14«), though they 
could use the test only uncritically, the scribes 
drew the line between Hagiographa and A., or 
justified the line already drawn oy the popular 
religious sense. All the Hagiographa could be 
regarded as meeting this test,* but Sir and 1 Mac, 
which were the most valued books of the A., could 

It is true that Jesus Sirach himself does not 
share this (later) view of inspiration. He may 
represent the earlier Pal. standpoint, from whicn 
Alexandrianism took its start. For him the Law 
is supreme. It is the embodied Wisdom of God 
(24*^). In some sense his knowledge is all derived 
from it (39*-* 24»"). On the other hand, between 
the prophets and the high priest of his own time 
he makes no sharp distinction (44-49) ; and for 
himself he claims an inspiration like that of the 
prophet (cf. SO^"- with 48-\ and see V 243'- »'-^ ni'^*^-). 

Ihe step from Sir to the Hellenistic Wis is 
not great. Here, too, the Law is the supreme 
revelation {e.g. 18^), t and here, too, in answer to 
prayer (cf. Sir 39^), the spirit of Avisdom is given to 
men, that spirit which is the life and reason of the 
world, and which ' generation after generation 
enters into holy souls and makes friends of God 
and prophets' (7", cf. chs. 1. G ft'.). 

Apart from 4 Ezr, which, not being in the LXX, 
does not deserve consideration at this point, the 
other books of the A. make no claim to be 
reckoned among sacred Scriptures. 

It is not easy to estimate the significance of the 
fact that we have no evi<lence in Jewish books that 
they were ever so regarded. Disputes are recorded 
regarding the exclusion of books of the Canon, but 
none rcgardinj;; the admission of a"' books. Yet it 
should bo said that the Jewish Rabbis usually 
covered up the tracks of past wanderings from 
the straight path that led to their own position. 
That additions to Dn and Est, and books like To 
and Jth, were once current among the Hagiograplia 
in Pal. is not impossible. Josephus uses 1 Mac, 1 Es, 
and Ad. Est, without distinction from can. books 
as historical sources, and even says that he has 
written his wliole history 'as the sacred books 
record it' {Ant. xx. xi. 2, cf. Pro. §3). Yet he 
counts 22 books, and excludes from the first rank 
all later than Est. In his time, then, the line had 
been drawn. 

In the rabbinical writings there are manj* 

•Baha balhra 14 oscribofl Job to Moses, Ru to Sam\iel, Ps to 
David, Cft and Ec to Hezckiah and his frit-nda, l)n nnd Fjit to 
the men of the (Jreat SynaRojfue, Ch to Ezra an<l Ncheniiah. 

t The identification of Wiswloni with the Ijiw is fonnd also in 
Bar SUT. 4. .Tiidith and Tobit and his son arc examples of the 
glorification of the Law in life. 

citations from Sir ; Zunz * counts 40, among 
them some ' in a manner usual only of Scripture 
passages,' and some as late as the 4th cent., 
which speak of it as one of the Kethubhim. Some 
doubt, at least, regarding its canonicity is 

f>robable. Of Ad. Est some traces exist in "lleb. 
iterature. Haggadic stories concerning Dn, 
among them traces of Bel, are found. The Mac- 
caba'an legend of the mother and seven sons 
(2 Mac, 4 Mac) was a favourite theme of rabbinical 
Midrashim. Yet 1 Mac, which Jerome knew in 
Heb., seems to have left no trace in rabbinical 
books. The legend of Judith is found, though in 
a form very dillerent from the LXX, and Tobit is 
still extant in Heb. Jerome says the Jews had 
Jth and To, and regarded them as historical 
but not as canonical ; while Origen says they did 
not possess them even among their A. 

3. The Relation of the Apocrypha to the 
Religious Tendencies and Parties of Judaism. 
— Of a theology of the A. it is unhistorical to 
speak. The collection presents the ideas of no one 
man or party, of no one period or place. The 
theology, or the religious ideas of each book, may 
be treated (see separate articles), or a history of 
the religious ideas and movements in Judaism in a 
given period ( 200 B.C.-lOO A.D.) may be under- 
taken, in which these books will be important 
sources ; but tlie historian of theology cannot 
separate the A. from the later can. l)Ooks on the 
one side, and from Philo and Josephus, the 
Pseudepigrapha and the early rabbinical literature, 
on the other. 

A few suggestions may, however, be made 
regarding the relation of these books to the chief 
religious tendencies and parties of Judaism. 

The main distinction in the post-exilic Jewish 
religion was that between the priest, whose sphere 
was the temple and its cultus, and the scribe, 
whose activity centred in the synagogue and the 
law. The centre of gravity seems to have shifted 
gradually from the temple to the synagogue, from 
priestly ritual to the legalism of the scribes, whose 
work made it possible for Jews in the Dispersion, 
out of reach of the temple, to live religious live.«, 
and prep.ared Judaism to survive the loss of its 
temple. The Hagiogiapha stands, as a whole, at 
the earlier stage, beginning with the Ps, the book 
of temple devotion, and ending with the CTeat 
temple history of Ch, Ezr, Neh. The five Megil- 
loth also came into connexion with the cultus by 
their use at the national feasts, though it is not 
known how early this happened. On the other 
liand, there is no early evidence of the regular use 
of Hagiographa in the synagogue service, and of 
tlie scribes' legalism they contain little. Only 
Dn, perhaps the latest book in this collection, can 
be called Pharisaic in tendency. 

In the A., on the other hand, the legal pre- 
dominates over the priestly interest. Sir, perhaps 
its oldest book, shows a transition from the priestly 
standpoint of Ch (to which belongs I Es) to 
the legal standpoint of the scribes (Zunz). The 
writer delights in the temple and the high priest's 
impressive ceremony, and dwells upon Aaron much 
more at length than upon Moses (ch. 45), and with 
still more enthusiasm upon the Simon whoso minis- 
trations he had himself witnessed (ch. 50) ; while 
Ezra, the patron saint of the Rabbis, is passed by 
in his praise of famous men. Y'et ho praises also 
the law as the wisdom of God (see above), and 
glorifies the oflice of the scribe (38**" 39>-"). 

But it was especially the Maccabwan crisis that 
sharjiened the contrast between the two tendencies. 
The desecration of the temple by Antioclms was 
the occasion of the war. The recovery and recon- 
secration of the temple was the great deed of 

• GnttNidirmtlirhen VortHigf drr Jnden, 2 Aufl. 1892, p. 106. 




Judas. This meant to the scribes the re-observance 
of the law, and with that they were content. It 
meant to Judas the lirst step towaid a recovery of 
political indei>endence. Judaism was organised 
about its temple. Its supreme authority was the 
high priest. So that the Maccabeean princes coveted 
the high priesthood as a political power, and finally 
gained it. But this was a violation of the law, 
and alienated the legalists, who became a party of 
separatists, Pharisees, with the scribes at their 
head and the synagogue as their institution. 
Against them the adherents of the temple and the 
new high priests became an opposing party, the 
Sadducees. The priestly tendency issued in a 
political party, the scribal in a religious party ; 
and in the conflict of these parties the inner his- 
tory of Judaism chiefly consisted until the fall of 
Jerusalem. Since Sadduceism was bound up with 
the temple and the national life, it ceased to be after 
the destruction of temple and State ; and since its 
views were as obnoxious to Christianity as to sur- 
viving Judaism, none of its distinct literary pro- 
ducts could survive. The A., however, owing 
partly to its Alex, selection, partly to its com- 
paratively early date, is not a purely Pharisaic 
product, and stands aside from the controversy 
between the two parties of which we know (from 
the Pharisaic side) in Ps-Sol, Enoch, etc. Two 
books of the A. are Sadducean in tendency. 
Sirach writes before the Maccaboean wars, so that 
his book can be called Sadducean only by anticipa- 
tion. Sadducean in tone was not only his attach- 
ment to the temple and the priesthood (above), but 
also his reserve in regard to angels, his sceptical 
attitude as to demons (21^) and the future life {e.g. 
j-jsT-sa 1411-19 411-1)^ perhaps his insistence on the 
entire freedom of man (15"" 17^-'^), and his spirit 
of liberality toward outside sources of knowledge 
and culture [e.g. 39^). There is, indeed, a polemic 
against a Pharisaic spirit of ceremonialism in 

;34l8-26 351ff. 

1 Mac follows the crisis out of which the parties 
arose, but precedes their serious conflicts. The 
writer's admiration for Judas and his brothers, 
' through whose hand salvation was given to Israel,' 
is unbounded (o^""-*, cf. S^-^ Q^"- 13»-« 14-'^- 16^ etc.). 
He paints Simon's reign in thoroughly Messianic 
colours (14*"^"), and in the decision that 'until a 
trustworthy prophet should arise . . . Simon should 
be their prince and high priest for ever,' his political 
and religious creed was summed up. It was the 
creed of Sadduceism. Sadducean also is the 
writer's attachment to the laws and customs of 
the nation, and his opposition to innovations (2^"^ 
321. 29 (J59 etc. ); but laws are for the strengthening and 
safety of the nation, and, when the observance of 
even so ssicred a law as the Sabbath exposed the 
nation to danger, its non-observance was decreed 
(233-4i)_ He looks to the valour of the hero to win 
victories (no miracle even in ^-^ IP""^); as Jos. 
says, ' The Sadducees take away fate . . . we are 
ourselves the causes of good,' etc. (Ant. Xlll. v. 9). 
His interest is in man more than in God, and in 
the present more than in the future. 

The essence of Pharisaism was that it gave 
religion (i.e. legalism) the first place. The Sadducee 
attempted to further the welfare of the individual 
and or the nation by direct means (politics, war, 
etc.) ; the Pharisaic faith was that if the individual 
and the community kept the law, God would by a 
supernatural act secure their welfare. The Saddu- 
cees would set aside the law in smaller things 
(Sabbath), or in greater (high priesthood), when 
circumstances required. To the Pharisee the law 
was inviolable, whatever the extremity. This is 
the principle of Pharisaism. Out of it various 
developments issued. 

That the law might never be broken by inadvert- 

ence, the scribes put about it a ' hedge ' of addi- 
tional precautionary rules, the Halacha, or oral 
law, which the Sadducees did not recognise. The 
belief that well-being was God's reward for the 
observance of the law, and misfortune His punish- 
ment for its transgression, though applied at first 
to the present life and lot of men and nations, 
might easily be referred to the future, and foster 
the thought of a coming national glory for Israel, 
and of an individual, life after deatli. It might 
also stimulate the belief in miracles and in angels 
and demons as agents of God's blessings and judg- 
ments. Yet these marks of later Pharisaism are 
not uniformly or conspicuously present in the A. 

Fasting is almost the only addition which we 
find to the Mosaic law (To 12«, Jth 8« etc., cf. Dn 
9* 10^), with a further ascetic emphasis upon ihe 
laws regarding food (Jth lO' l\^- \2^-\ To l*"*-, Ad. 
Est 14", 2 Mac 5"^ 6^1). The creed of the Bk of 
Jth is that no enemy can prevail against Israel 
so long as it keeps the ceremonial law, but if it 
breaks it, under whatever stress, it will fall (5""^' 
lp-19 817-20) Moreover, Judith's deliverance of the 
nation is conditioned upon her individual fulfilment 
of the law even amid the greatest difliculties (S*-^ 
12^"^). This is true Pharisaism, and yet the book 
contains neither Messianic hope, nor rewards after 
death (16" is not to be so understood), nor miracle, 
nor angel. Tobit illustrates the Pharisaic prin- 
ciple in the life of an indi\'idual. Legal righteous- 
ness is rewarded by deliverance from evil, long life 
and prosperity ; while sin is always punished by 
evil, and all evil is due to sin (3'-« \^-'^^ U^-s-^^). 
Here angels and demons play a far greater part 
than in any other book of the A. The national hope 
also is expressed (13. 14^"^), but there is no resur- 
rection. The Bk of Bar contains the national hope 
(23^-35 425-37 51-9)^ ^ju^; jjQ individual resurrection. 
2 Mac views the work of Judas as an illustration 
of Pharisaism. It knows of no laxity regarding 
the law (cf. 5^ 6" 8** 12** 15^). The history is 
helped forward by angels and miracles and signs 
(325^.33 521. 95 io29f- 118 i5i2ff.)_ The national hope 
finds frequent expression (I27-29 27- is etc.); and, 
here only in the A., the resur. of the bodies of the 
righteous is insisted upon (79. 11. w- 36 \2*3i. 14^). 

It is evident that the later marks of Pharisaism 
(cf. Ac 23^"^) were not uniformly present. Legalism 
stands as the characteristic mark. ' This is the 
book of the commandments of God, and the law 
that endureth for ever. All they that hold it fast 
are destined for life, but such as leave it shall die ' 
(Bar 41). And since the law of life was Israel's 
law, with legalism went particularism. * O Israel, 
happy are we ! for the things that are pleasing to 
God are made kno^vTi unto us' (Bar 4''). Of this 
feeling, and the corresponding contempt for other 
peoples, passing over, in times of trouble, into 
jealousy and hatred, there is enough in the A. 
It inspires Ad. Est as it does Est itself. Jth and 
2 Mac are dominated by it. It is a presupposition 
of To (4'- etc. ). Even Sir shares it, though his ruling 
interest is in the individual, not in the nation 
(esp. 361-", cf. 24, and in 44-50, e.g. 47-"-). Only 
the Hel. Bk of Wis rises to a broader view. 
In chs. 10-19 the special care of God for Israel 
is shown. ' In every way thou didst magnify 
thy people, and glorify them, . . . standing by 
them in every time and place' (19-^). But while 
Israel is God's son (18^^ cf.^), He also loves all men 
(1124-26 Q7 113)^ ajj(i ujg judgments are remedial 
(122^-). Nor, in spit« of the first impression of 3'-*' 
5""^ (cf. 4'''^^), does the writer hold to a future 
earthly glory for Israel. The consummation is 
heavenly (immortality of the soul, here first in 
Jewish books), and is morally conditioned. 

The Essenic type of Pharisaism is represented 
inly in 4 Ezr, which does not properly belong to 




the collection. Here only do we find a personal 
Meissiah. Hel. Judaism, which stood at one side 
of the conllict between Pharisee and Sadducee, 
is represented by Wis, which, though it sets the 
religious life and faith in contrast to worldliness 
and scepticism, puts no stress on ceremonialism, 
but interprets the law in a more ethical sense, 
and reviews the history of Israel to illustrate the 
beneficent rule of Uodb wisdom, rather than the 
inviolablcness of His law. 

But 4 Ezr cannot be treated apart from other 
apocalypses, nor Wis apart from other products 
of Hellenism. 

It i-< ( hieJly in these two isolated books that 
fnii i;4n t kinents are prominent. Apart from these, 
and tlie ( I'ers. ?) angeloloj^y of To, the A. stands 
in the main on (later) U'l ground in its views of 
God, of man, and of the world. 

CHURCH.— 1. In the New Testament.— The 
writers of NT used almost exclusively the LXX 
OT, and we have no reason to suppose that a*' 
additions were wanting at that time. There are 
no direct citations from A. ; this, however, is true 
also of the disputed books. Song, Ec, and Est 
as well as of Jos and Ezr-Neh. The Pent., 
the Prophets, and the Pss were, for obvious 
reasons, most frequently cited. The other books 
of the Hagiographa, and the A., offered far fewer 
material points of contact with Christianity, and 
would not be allowed the same value in argument 
by Jews. An acquaintance with a"^ books is, how- 
ever, generally recognised in the case of some NT 
writers. Thus there are parallelisms between 
Ja and Sir (e.g. Ja 1'" and Sir 5'^), between 
He and Wis (e.g. He P and Wis 7^), and be- 
tween Paul ;uul Wis (cf. Ro 9^^ with Wis 15^; 
Ro 1-" ■- \\itli Wis 11. 13. 15; 2 Co 5^-* with Wis 
9^*), which reveal familiarity with this literature, 
but Avhich do not imply that authority was ascribed 
to it. The question of the relation of the A. to 
the Canon cannot be decided on the ground of NT 

2. In the Eastern Church.— There is peculiar 
difficulty in determining the place of the A. in 
relation to the Canon in the E. Church because 
of the conflict between different lines of evidence. 
W^e shall consider (a) Original Usage, (6) Scholarly 
Theory, (c) Manuscripts, (d) Versions, (c) The later 
Greek Church. 

(u) Oriqincd f/*rt(7e.*— The Christian Church used 
the LXX as its OT Scripture, and the Church 
Fathers cite all parts of it with similar formulas. 
1 and 2 Clement, Barnabas, Ignatius, and the 
Teaching of the Twelve, contain allusions to a*' 
by the side of can. books. Irenaeus cites Ad. I)n, 
Bar, and Wis; Tertullian— Sir, Wis, Ad. Dn, 
jinil l!;ir; Clem. Alex. — Sir, Wis, Bar, To, 
All. 1)11 ; Cyprian — Sir, Wis, To, Bar; all 
with tiie formulas ('it is written,' 'Scripture 
says,' etc.) used of can. Avorks. This usage con- 
tinues to be the jjrevailing one, and Origen can 
appeal to the universal practice of the Church from 
the beginning against the appeal of Africanus to 
the authority of the Heb. Canon. 

(b) Scholarly Theory.— Th^ LXX came to Chris- 
tianity from the synagogue of Hel. Judaism, and 
with it was accepted the theory of the inspiration 
and sacredness of this translation. The story of 
its origin, told by Aristeas of the Pent., was ex- 
tended to the whole, and heightened into absolute 
miracle. (Justin, Dinl. 68. 7L 84 ; Iren. iii. 21. 
2-4; Tertul. Apul. 18; Clem. Utrom. i. 38. 148. 
149 ; Origen, ad Afric. 4 ; Cyril, Cat. iv. 34 ; Epi- 
phanius, de metM.). But on the other hand, when- 
ever the l>ooks of OT are counted, the number is 
given as 22 (24), and is expressly derived from the 
• Sec the references in Schiirer, UJP f{ 32. 33. 

Jewish (Heb.) Canon. That the LXX wa.s a tr. 
of the Heb. was, of course, never lost sight of, 
but it was an inspired tr., sanctified by Christian 
use from the apostles onwards. The discrepancy 
between the two was obvious, and yet could not be 
given its natural weight. The question of the 
status of the A. depended upon the relative im- 
portance given to traditional Christian usage and 
current Jewish usage, summarily expressed in the 
number 22, or to practice and theory, and u^ran 
new theories devised for their adjustment. 

Five possibilities seemed open : (1) To insert the 
A. in or in such a way as to retain the number 
22. (2) To introduce some of the most valued 
A. into NT (as distinctively Christian ]K)sses- 
sions), or to append them at the end. i.'ii To make 
a third class of books, between (.ni. .nil uncan. 
indignity. (4) To give up the Heb. iui the LXX 
Canon, making theory square with practice. (5) To 
give up the LXX for the Heb., making practice 
square with theory. The first three ways are 
followed, with more or less combination, in the 
East, the fourth finally by Rome, the fifth finally 
by Protestantism, though in neither case witn 
entire consistency, since, in the Vulg., the LXX 
has been considerably modified in accordance with 
the Heb., and in the I'rot. Bible the order of the 
Vulg. (and LXX) has been retained. 

It is important to set forth the place of the A. in the various 
theoretical Canons of Eastern writei-s somewhat in detail. 

Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 150-170 a.d.) lekrne<i from Jewi 
or Jewish Chri.stians in Pal. the contents of OT. His list (Euseb. 
iv. 26. 13, 14) contains only the books of the Heb. (omitting Est), 
but the titles and order (?) are from the LXX [Ch after 
K, Proph. after Poet, books ; so in general : (1) History, 
(2) Poetry, (3) Prophecy]. It cannot be certainlv inferred that 
Jer and Dn were without the a»i additions, '/he Muratorian 
Fragment (175-200 a.d.) contains only NT (whether OT was 
origmally given is uncertain) ; but it inserts Wis between 
2 Jn and Rev (as by Philo?), and gives to the Shepherd the 
position of a book that is to be privately, not publicly, read. Its 
place is not among prophets or apostles, but also not among 
heretical books. The writer makes use of the second solution 
of the problem and suggests the third. 

Ongen (c. 185-254) deals with the problem with the fullest 
knowledge. His great Hexapla testifies to the importance of 
the problem presented by the deviating texts of OT Scripture, 
and gave him minute familiarity with the divergence of the 
IjXX from the Heb. In his Com. on Psalms (Eus. vi. 25. 1) he 
gives a list of the 22 books of the Heb. Canon, apparently like 
Slelito's, with the addition of Est. But he begins the use of 
the first solution of the problem above suggests bj* including 
in Jer not only La, but Ep. Jer (Bar?). Moreover, he says 
that 1 and 2 Ezr were counted as one book. This would 
be understood by Gr. readers as referring, not to the Heb. 
Ezr and Neh, but to the LXX 1 Es and 2 Es [=Ezr + 
Neh). He mentions 'the Maccab»an books' at the end of his 
list as outside of the Cinon. But from the Ep. to Africanus we 
learn that this Heb. Canon was not regarded by Origen as of 
final validity for Christians. He criticises the theory of a Heb. 
Canon on the ground of traditional Christian practice (i.e. he sup- 
plement.s the first by the fourth solution). His view is that the 
present is not the original Heb. Canon, since Jewish rulers and 
elders hid from the people passages that might bring tiiem 
into discredit (§ 9). On this ground Susanna is defended, 
though it is now among the Jewish A. But To and Jth, 
which the Jews do not possess even among their ' hidden ' 
books, are to be retained simply on the ground of Christian 
usage. Providence must have guided the practice of the 
Church, and Judaism is not to dictate to Christianity (the 
Catholic principle). 

Cj/ril, Bisiiop of Jerus. (Cat. iv. 33-36. i. insists 

with equal stress upon the number 22, tba . Canon, 

and the authority of the usage of the i nunn. tiis list of 
22 (12 historical, 5 poetical, and 5 prophetical) he seems to 
regard as that of the LXX in current use. His Jer includes 
Bar, and his Dn ^and Est?) the additions. He declares that 
the books not read in the churches are not to be read in private, 
and, after all, himself cites Wis as by Solomon (Cat. ix. 2, 16). 

The Sj/nod of Laodieea (o. 3«56) affimis Cyril's list, with 
minor clianges of order. The list in ApoM. Canon, ii-:>, is also 
Cyril's, with the addition, at the end of the historie.s, of 1-3 
Maa On the other hand, the metrical lists of (irctjnry of Na«. 
(d. 390) and Amphilochixu, though following the same order, 
seem to have omitted the a*) additions as well as Est. 

Epiphanitti (c. 315 403) moves in the opposite direction. 
Like (jyril, he regarded the LXX as the insj)ired tr. of the 22 
books of the Heb. Canon ; but besides 1 Es, Bar, Ep. Jer and 
Ad. Dn, he seems to have incUidetl, under Est (witli Ad.?) 
To and Jth ; anfl, against Cyril, he introduces an intennc<liate 
class of writings, not ' in the ark,' but yet ' good and useful.' 
Here belong Wis and Sir, whirh he puts after NT in his list 




(U(tr. 76, cf. Harr. 86, de rnen*. 4X He thus provides for the 
practical recognition of all the A. except Mac and Pr. Han. 
There are still other books, apoerjipha proper, some of whi<d» 
the Seventy translate, upon which he does not wholly shut 
the door (de men*. 5. 10). 

Athau(uiu», in his 3dth Easter Letter (367 A.D.X carries 
Qirouzh more consistently the third solation. His 22 books 
include Bar, Ep. Jer, 1 Es (?), Ad. Dn. But after NT he 
adds, ' for greater exactness,' that there are other books outside 
of these, not canonised, but stamped by the Fathers as books to 
be read by catechum«»s for their instruction. These are Wis, 
Sir, Est, Jth, To, AiJ. and Shepherd. They are called i»«j«- 
.*«-««t«»«. books to be read, i.e. by catechumens. 

T' ■ •' fold division is followed by the list in tiie 

•ephonu, which, after the 23 books of OT and 
X, gives 'diluted' books of OT, vix. 1-3 Mac, 
\v i^. i.i. I =-:>ol. Est, Jth, Sus, To. There follow the disputed 
bcjks of NT (Apoc. of Jn and of P, Ep. Bar and Goroel of 
HebrewsX and, fin&Uy, the ' apocrypha' of OT and NT (above). 
He^ the A. are books whose canonicity is in dispute, i»'riA*j'»- 
futti. The name and the estimate differ essentially from 
Athanasius, though both are copied in the St/nopgis o/{Pteudo) 

In the ' LUt of 60,* after the 60 can. books of OT and NT, 
follow, as ' outside of the 60,' Wis, Sir, 1-4 Mac, Est, Jth, To. 
Aftor these come the 'apocrypha' (above). 

^^'e find then in the lists of writers of the 
E. Church, from the 2nd to the 6th or Tth cent., 
a practically unanimous adherence to the Heb. 
Canon of 22 books, and efforts to harmonise this 
-with the Christian LXX by making the 22 as 
comprehensive of LXX additions as possible, and 
by assigning to other books of the A., so far as 
they were valued, a separate place, usually after 
NT' but distinct from heretical, rejected books. 

('■I y[.inai:r[pts. — It is a striking fact that no 
extant MS of the LXX represents even approxi- 
mately the Canon of Cyril or Athanasius. In no 
known Greek text do the A. stand by themselves. 
The codii vith the usage, not with the 

theory, of irch. 

Of the 9 uD' 'lais ui v, mc-h a*i books are found, the Vat. and the 
Alex, are given at the be^nning of this artacle. Next in 
importance (3) stands the Sm., whidi originally contained the 
whole Bible. Of OT the extant pttfts are : (Fragments of Gn, 
Nu, 1 Ch. andEzr), Neh, Est, 7V>, JtA, 1 Mac, 4 Mac, Is, Jer, La 
(part), XII (except Hos, Am, Mic), Ps, Pr, Ec, CJa, ITis, Sir, Job. 
(4) Cod. Ephrsmi Syri (5th cent.), contains fragments of Job, 
Pr, Ec »t». Sir, Ca. (5) CJod. Venetus (8th or 9th cent.) 
contains Job (end), Pr, Ec, Ca, ^i>. Sir, XU, Is, Jer, Bar, La, 
Dn \.Ad.\ To, Jth, 1-4 Mae. (6) CJod. Basiliano-Vaticanus (9th 
cent.) contains second half of Pent, historical books, including 
1 Ei and Ad. E*t. (7) Cod. Harchalianns (6th or 7th cent.) 
contains the prophets in the order of B (so Bar, Ep. Jer, Ad. 
Dn). (a) Cod. Cryptoferratensis (Tth or Sth cent.) contains the 
prophets. (9) Palimpsest fragments of Wis and Sir, of 6th or 
7ih cent. Swete does not cite 6 and 9, but adds cursive Cod. 
Chisianus (9th cent.?), which contains Jer, Bar, La, Ep. Jer 
Dn, according to the LXX [all other MSS have substituted Theo- 
dotion's Dn], HippoMus on Dn, Dn according to Theod., Ezk, 
Is. Botii texts of Dn contain the additions. It is noteworthy 
that several cursives of the poetical books give Ps-Sol in the 
order. Job, Pr, Ec, Ca, Wit, Ps-Sol., Sir. [Swete, vol. iiL p. xvL f.] 

[d) Versions. — The Oriental translations of OT 
were nearly all made from the LXX, and were 
inclined rather to enlarge than to reduce its Canon. 

The old Svr. Peshitta was an exception to 
this rule. "as from the Heb., and so con- 

tained rv o lacked Ch. The influence of 

the I " ' h never, so great that the Pesh. 

was ~ed in accordance with it, and the 

a*^ K"ji^- V. ric incorporated with some further 
adi lit ions. The chief codex (Ambrosianus) contains 
I>7-^^ Ep. Jer, land-2 En. B '. . Jth, Apoc. Bar. [here 
onlv], AiK)c. of Ezra o.l/'^tc. [SMac^Jos. 

BJ' \\.\ In orh .J found 1 Es, To, 

Pr. M'lii. ' r Ike titii cent, has a 'book of 

women/ ■ t, Su.^, Jth, ThecLA. 

Wholly t .v< / . iiial. on the other hand, was the 
critical view of the Nestorian school at Nisibis, 
which put Sir in the class of fully can. books, and 
regarded as of intermediate authority, Ch, Job, 
Ezr, Xeh. Jth, Est, 1 and 2 J/'/-, Wis, Ca. 

Exceptional also is a Syr. MS at Cambridge, in 
which an attempt is made to arrange OT in chrono- 
logical order. This naturally throws of the 
Ar at the end. Wis is after Solomon's books, Bar 
and Ep. Jer after Jer. After the prophets, follow 

Dn [and Bel], \\ :, - , Est, Jth, Ezr-Neh, Sir, 
1-4 Mac, 1 Es, l<j. 

The Ethiopic version not only adopted the LXX 
Canon without criticism, bat added various books 
besides 4 Ezr, several of which survived in no other 
collection, e.g. Enoch, Jubilees, Ascension of Is, 

The Amwnian version also draws no line between 
Canon and A. 

(e) The Later Gr. CAurcA.— The views of the 
Fathers of the Eastern Church could not be without 
permanent influence, but their failure to reach 
consistency made it possible for the LXX to retain 
its currency. At the time of the Reformation 
some Eastern scholars, appealing to Cyril and 
Athanasius, declared the a** books to he nncan. 
So Metrophanes Critopulos (1625) and CyrU Lucar 
(1629). Against them the Synods of Constanti- 
nople (1638), Jalfa (1642), ancl Jems. (1672) sus- 
tained the older usage, and declared the full 
canonicity of the A. It appears, however, that 
clearness and consistency have never been reached, 
for Philaret's Longer Catechism of the Orthodox 
Catholic E. Church (1839, etc.), which has oflicial 
sanction, gives to sdl books outside of the 22 a 
subordinate place, as meant for the reading of 
th(^e just entering the Church (citing Athanasius) ; 
while the official Bible of the Gr. Church contains 
(after Ch) Pr. Man ; (after Neh) 1 Es, To, Jth ; 
(after Ca) Wis, Sir; (after La) Ep. Jer, Bar; 
(after Mai) 1-3 Mae, 4 Ezr. 

3. In the Western Chukcth. — (a) Roman 
Catholic. — In the Lat. Church there was a stronger 
inclination to let Christian usage, rather than 
scholarly theory, determine the place of t'le A. in 
the Canon ; and this in spite of the fact that Home 
produced the man of all antiquity who most 
strongly pressed the sole validity of the Heb. Canon 
(Jerome), and committed to this very man the 
revision of its OT Scriptures. 

The earliest Lat. tr. (Itala) was made from the 
LXX, and seems to have contained all the A. of the 
LXX except 3 and 4 Mac, and to have added 2 Els. 
Jerome first revised the Itala after the LXX, 
but then tr. the OT anew from Heb. In this tr. the 
A. would fall out. And this Jerome demands. In 
the famous Prol. Galeatus he gives a list of the 22 
books of the Heb. Canon in the Heb. order, and 
adds, ' whatever is beyond these is to be put among 
the A.' So Wis, Sir, Jth, To, and Shepherd 'are 
not in the Canon. Of Mac, I have found the first 
book in Heb. ; the second is Greek,' ete. 

This explicit denial that even an intermediate 
position should be given to the A. would, in con- 
sistency, require their entire removal from the 
Bible. ' But Jerome elsewhere gives these books 
an intermediat« position. For he says (Prol. to 
Bks of Sol), 'as the Church reads Jth and To 
and the Bks of Mac, but does not receive them 
among can. Scriptures, so also let it read these 
two books [Wis and Sir] for the edification of the 
people, not for confirming the authority of Church 
dogmas.' Only by such a view can we understand 
Jerome's revision of Jth and To, which he under- 
took, indeed, under protest and with careless haste, 
excusing himself by the fact that they were 
extant in Chaldee, and that the Conned of Nicaea 
counted Jth in the number of sacred Scriptures 
(of this there is no other evidence). Jerome also 
inserted the Additions to Dn and Est, distin- 
guishing tliem by marks, and collecting the Ad. 
Est together at the end of the book, where they 
have remained, out of their proper place, ever 

After these concessions by Jerome himself, it is 
not strange that the other books of the A. gradually 
found their old place in his version as it gained 




01 other Lat. Fathers, Hilary of Poitiers (d. 3C8) reaffirms 
Origen'sCan., but shows some inclination to add To and Jtli, 
lor which Origcn's position mive ground. 

Hufinut (d. 410), who studied at Alexandria and Jerus., gives 
the K. list of 22 books, and puts the A. in an intermediate class, 
which he culls (lor the first time?) Ecclesiastici, viz. H'w, .St'c, 
To, Jth, lik* o/ Mae, and, in NT, Shephenl and Two Ways 
[also Ju<l},'inent according to Peter?). These the Fathers 
wishoil to be read in the churches, but not brought lorwaitl for 
the coullnimlion of faith. 'Other Scriptures they name<i ««' 
which tliev wiblicd not to be read in the churches.' The three- 
fold dh'ision is K., but the name ' ecclesiastical ' and the 
explanation (which is praeticallj/ the view ol Jerome also) are 
new. The A. are to be read not privately, but in the churches. 
This would ori;,'iiKilly have meant full canonicity. But a dis- 
tinction is atl«ini>teti in degrees ol authority for doctrine 
among books which, in their text and in their church use, are 
not distinguislie*!. It is not strange that the theory of an inter- 
mediate class gained no firm footing in the W., and that the 
A. went into the first, not into the third class. 

The early Lat. lists are characterised by the two groups, 
(1) Ps, Pr, Ca, Ec, Wi», Sir ; (2) Job, To, Est, Jth, 1 and 2 Mac, 
1 and 2 Es, in which, apart from the additions to the prophets 
Jer and l)n, the Iwoks ol A. are usually lound. They are 
lound in the Van. of Mommsen, which jicrhaps represents the 
average Western Can. ol e. .'500 a.d. It includes the A., and still 
counts 24 books (Uev 4i*) by the device ol reckoning the 6 
Solomonic books as one. The West had not, however, the 
interest in the number 24 that the East hivd in 22, and generally 
disreganled even this formal agreement with the Jews. 

Cauiodorua (Instittitio, etc., chs. xii.-xiv., c. 544 a.d.) gives 
Jerome's (Heb.) Can., then Augustine's, and finally the Can. of 
the a/Ut^wa traiwZai 10, which represents Lat. usage l)efore Jerome, 
viz. Qn-Ch ; Ps, Sol 6 (Pr, Wig, Sir, Ec, Ca) ; Prophets ; Job, 
To, Est, Jth, 1. 2 Es, 1. 2 Mac. The two groups are to be 
noted. The divergence ol the three lists Irom each other 
seems to cause the writer no trouble. 

Similar to this is the list of the Deeretum Gelanii, which, il 
It is that of the Synod of 3S2, is the first ofHcial Can. of 
the Roman Church. It puts Wig, Sir with Solomonic books. 
Bar with Jer, and ends with an ' onler ol histories,' which is 
our second group, as follows : Job, To, 1. 2 Es, Est, Jth, 
I. 2 Mae. 

The next offlcial OT Can. wos that ol the African Councils of 
Eippo (39:J) and Carthage (397) : Gn-Ch, Job, Ps, Sol 5, 12 
prophets. Is, Jer, Dn, Ezk, To, Jth, Est, 1. 2 Es, 1. 2 Mac. 
Here Job is separated from the second group and put in its old 
connexion with Ps, Pr. These councils were nominated bi' 
Atigngtiru;, whose weight on the side of Church tradition over- 
bore the influence of Jerome's learning. Augustine stands for 
the Catholic principle as deteniiining the Can. (dc doct. ii. 8, 12), 
even when he feels the objections, e.g. to Wig and Sir, that 
the ancient Church received them is decisive (de dv. xvii. 
20, 1). Augustine gives, in de doct. ii. 8, 13, a list of 44 books of 
OT — 22 historical, made by adding to Gn-Ch, as a secondary 
list, our secon*! group : Job, To, Est, Jth, 1. 2 Mac, 1. 2 Es. ; 
and 22 prophetit-nl, made by prefixing to the 10 prophets our 
first group : Ps, Pr, Ca, Ec, Wis, Sir. In his last book, how- 
ever (SpeciUuin), he seems inclined to put the A. at the end 
ol OT Can., separating Wis, Sir Irom group 1, and Job from 
group 2. This may reveal a growing sense ol the secondary 
authority or security of the A. 

Innocent i. of Rome, in a letter to the Bishop ol Toulouse 
(40.")), gives a list in which the two groups still appear : Gn-4 K 
(with Uu) ; Prophets ; Solomon 5, Ps ; ' ol histories,' Job, I'o, 
Est, Jth, 1. 2 Mac, 1. 2 Es, 1. 2 Ch. 

Tlie outcome of the matter in the Lat. Church 
was tlie Vulff., and the leading MS of it (Cod. 
Amiatinus, c. 700) gives, in the name of 
Jerome, a list identical with that sanctioned at 
Trent (see the list at the beginning of this article). 
The order is nearer to that of Augustine in dc 
doct. ii. 8 tlian to that of the Council of Hippo. 
The secondary group of histories follows the primary 
(Gn-Ch), and tlie group of poetry follows it, preced- 
ing the propliets. Job, however, is put between 
the two, so that it might belong either to history 
or poetry, and 1. 2 Mac are separated from the 

i;roup and put at the end — a partial compromise 
»etw(!cn the toi)i(al place given to this group by 
Augustine, and the more chronological place 
assigned it in the Old Latin, and at Hinpo. The 
result is that the A. are found chiefly in the 
middle of OT, distinguished in no way from other 
books. Until the decree of Trent, however, it was 
still po.ssible to regard the A. as of inferior 
authority, and, when can. was understood to mean 
authoritative, even as not in the Canon. The 
middle ages furnished some followers of Jerome 
(e.ff. Hugo of St. Victor, d. 1140; Peter of 
Clugny, (I. 1156; Nicolaus of Lyra. d. 1340) who 
anticipate the view of Cardinal Ximenes (1437- 

1517), who says in the Preface to the great Com- 
plutensian Polyglott, that the a*' books are outside 
of the Canon, and are received by the Cliurch as useful 
reading, not as authoritative for doctrine. Erasmus 
(1467-1536) also follows Jerome, though expressing 
himself with his usual reserve and formal sub- 
mission to the judgment of the Church. ' Whether 
the Church receives them as possessing the same 
authority as the others, the spirit of the Church 
must know.' Cardinal Cajetan, Luther's opponent 
at Augsburg (1518), would interpret the decisions 
of Councils and Fathers by Jerome. 

Though the Vulg. Canon had been reaflirmed by 
Pope Eugenius IV. and put forth as a decree of the 
Council of Florence (1439), it is not probable that 
the Koman Church would have taken the decisive 
step of 1545, against the views of its own best 
scholars, if it had not been for Luther. The 
Council of Trent declared the Vulg. to be in all 
parts of equal authority, and dclinitely rejected 
the efforts of Ximenes and others to put the A. in 
a separate, ' ecclesiastical ' or ' deutero-can.' 
In the Bibliotheca Sancta of Sixtus Senensis the 
case is correctly stated. The distinction of Proto- 
can. and Deutero-can. or ecclesiastical books is 
given (to the latter class belong, in OT, Est, To, 
Jth, Bar, Ep. Jer, Wis, Sir, Ad. Dn, 1 and 2 Mac ; 
in NT, Mk 16"--^ Lk 22«-« Jn 7='-8i', He, Ja, 
2 P, 2 and 3 Jn, Jude, Ilev), but the distinction has 
only historical significance. These books, it is 
said, were not known till a late period ; were even 
formerly held by the Fathers to be a"' and not can. ; 
were at first permitted to be read only before 
catechumens (Athanasius), then before all believers 
(Ilufinus), but only for edification, not for the con- 
firmation of doctrine ; but were at last adopted 
among Scriptures of irrefragable authority. 

This consistent position is deserted by modern 
Catholics for the unhistorical view that the LXX 
Can. was the original one, which was shortened 
by Jews for an antichristian purpose ; so that 
the words proto-can. and deutero-can. reverse the 
true state of the case, and have not even an 
historical justification (Kaulen, in Wetzer u. 
Welte, Emiyk.''^ art. ' Kanon'). 

(6.) Protestant. — Even on the ground of Catholic 
scholarship those Avho denied the authority of the 
Church must give the A. a secondary place. The 
first Prot. etlbrt to fi.K the place of the A. was made 
by Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt, in his De 
canonicis scriptw-is, 1520. He discusses the views 
of Augustine and Jerome, and vindicates Jerome's 
position. He gives the Heb. OT Can., Law, Pro- 
phets, and Hagio^apha, tliinks tliese divisions 
indicate a decroasmg order of value, and makes 
corresponding discriminations in NT. OT A. he 
divides into two classes: (1) Wis, Sir, Jth, To, 
1 and 2 Mac ; ' Hi sunt apocryphi, i.e. extra 
canonem hebrfeorum, tamen agiographi.' (2) 3 and 
4 Ezr, Bar, Pr. Man, Ad. Dn : ' Hi libri sunt 
plane apocryphi virgis censoriis animadvertendi.' 
This significant eflbrt remained almost without 

In contrast to this attempt to solve the problem 
by historical means (to return to the original posi- 
tion), Luther wavered l)etween a free criticism of 
the Can. by the Christian consciousness, and, for 
practical purposes, the acceptance of the current 
Bible. He wished 1 Mac had tlie place of Est in 
the Canon. Of Jth, To, Sir, Wis, he judges 
favourably. Even Ad. Dn and Ad. Est have 
much good in them. Bar and 2 Mac, on the 
other hand, he condemns. 

In Luther's Bible (completed 1534) the A. stand 
between OT and NT, with tlie title: 'A., that is 
books which are not held equal to tlie sacred 
Scriptures, and nevertheless are useful and gootl to 
read.' They include our A. with the exception of 




1 juid 2 Es, Luthers jud^ent on these two books 
was especially unfavourable, but for their omission 
he liad the authority of Jerome, whose view per- 
haps affected their exclusion at Trent. 

The Reformed Church took a somewhat less 
favourable view of the A. In the Ziirich Bible 
(1529-1530) they stand, in Leo Jud.'s tr., after NT, 
as an appendix to the Bible, Avith the non-committal 
preface : ' These are the books which by the ancients 
were not wTitten nor numbered among the Biblical 
books, and also are not found among the Hebrews.' 
Here 1 and 2 Es are included, as well as 3 Mac ; 
while Three, Pr. Man, Ad. Est were added only in 
later edd. 

The French Bible of Calvin (1535) puts the A. 
between OT and NT, with the title : ' The volume 
of the a** books contained in the Vulg. tr., which we 
have not found in Heb. or Chaldee.' Here 1 and 2 
Es are included. A preface, doubtless by Calvin, 
reaffirms Jerome's view as to the value of these 

Coverdale was the first to tr. the A. from Gr. into 
En". (1536). He put them between OT and NT, 
with the title : ' Apocripha. The bokes and treatises 
which amonge the fathers of olde are not rekened 
to be of like authorite with the other bokes of the 
byble, nether are they foude in the Canon of the 

Matthew's Bible (1537) reproduces Coverdale's 
A., and translates Calvin's Preface, stating that 
these books are not to be read publicly in the 
Church, nor used to prove doctrine, but only for 
' furtherance of the knowledge of the history, and 
for the instruction of godly manners.' 

Cranmer's Bible (1540) divides OT into three 
parts: (1) Pent., (2) Hist, books, (3) Remaining 
books ; and adds, ' The volume of the bokes called 
Hagiographa,' so called ' because they were wont 
to be read not openly and in common, but as it 
were in secret and apart ' ! But in the reprint of 
1541 they appear as A., and simply as ' the fourth 
part of the Bible.' 

The Bishops' Bible (1568) treats the A. stUl more 
favourably. The table of contents gives it as 
' The fourth part called Apocryphus.' The separate 
title-page reads, ' The Volume of the bookes called 
Apocrypha.' But a classified list of 'the whole 
Scripture of the Bible,' under the headings Legal, 
Historical, Sapiential, and Prophetical, is given, 
which follows the Vulg., with two changes of order 
due to its scheme (puts 1 and 2 Mac after Job, and 
Ps before Is), and with the addition of 3 and 4 Ezr, 
with the explanation in the case of these two books 
only that they are apocryphal. 

In the Authorized Version (1611) 'the bookes 
called Apocrj-pha' are marked by the running title 
' Apocrypha ' at the top of the page, but have no 
preface or separate table of contents ; and in the 
table of lessons at the beginning they are included 
under OT. 

The edd. so far seem to indicate a growing rather 
than diminishing regard for the books. It was not 
long, however, before e<ld. of AV began to appear 
in which the A. was omitted (1629, etc.). 

The Confessions of Lutheran and Reformed 
Churches agree substantially with Article VI. of the 
Eng. Church (Lat. 1562, Eng. 1571), which, with 
the list of A., explains : 'And the other books (as 
Jerome saith) the Church doth read for example of 
life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it 
not apply them to establish any doctrine.' But a 
less favourable judgment, held at first by few, has 
gradually, through much controversy, prevailed in 
Protestantism. At the Synod of Dort (161S) a 
strong, though unsuccessful, effort was made to re- 
move the A. wholly from the Bible. In England the 
opposition came especially from the Puritans, and 
took final form in the Westminster Confession 

(1648) : 'The books commonly called A., not being 
of divine inspiration, are no part of the Can. of the 
Scripture ; and therefore are of no authority in the 
Church of God, nor to be in any otherwise approved, 
or made use of, than other human writings.' This 
means the exclusion of the A. from the Bible and 
from use in Church serNnce, which the Puritans 
demanded in 1689. It was not until 1827, after 
two years' sharp dispute, that the British and 
Foreign Bible Society decided to exclude the A. 
from all its publications of the Bible. 

Within the Church of England the number of 
readings from the A. has been reduced. Origin- 
ally covering Sept. 27-Nov. 23, in 1867 selections 
from Wis, Sir, and Bar only are assigned for 
Oct. 27-Nov. 17, beside some selections for certain 
holy days. The latter, with reading from To, 
Wis, and Sir for Nov. 2-20, are retained by the 
Amer. Epis. Church, while the Irish removes all. 

Among non-Episcopal Churches the A. has had 
in recent years practically no recognition. 

On the Continent the movement toward the ex- 
clusion of the A. from edd. of the Bible has been 
slower. The decision of the British Society in 
1827 met with a storm of disapproval. The con- 
troversy revived in 1850, when numerous works 
appeared for and against the retention of the A. 
in edd. of the Bible. Its ablest champions were, 
among Conser>-ative scholars, Stier and Hengsten- 
berg ; among Liberals, Bleek. In the Revision of 
Luther's Bible (1892) it still stands, with Lather's 

The long controversy regarding the canoni«}ity 
of the a** books, in which the power of tradition 
and the weakness of reason in matters of religious 
concern are conspicuously illustrate<i, may be said 
to have ended for Protestantism. The modem 
historical interest, on the other hand, is putting 
these WTitings in their true place as significant 
documents of a most important era in religious 

IJTERATURE.— 1. Tkxt : Fritzsche, Libri Apoeryphi Veterit 
Testamenti Graeee (lipsue ISTl) ; Edd. of the JLXX, esp. Swete 
(Cunb. 1887-18W). 

2. Translations crro Esousb : Ball, 7VU Vetriorwm A. (AT, 
with rarious renderings and readingsX 1S93 ; A Revised tr. by 
Kssell (below) ; ChurtOD, Unean. and Apocryphal Scripture* 
0884) ; The RV of the A. (VBOS). 

3. IsTXODUcnox asd Commkitaxibs : Schfirer, HJP, tr. by 
Vacpttenaa, et aL 1885-1890, S5 32, 33 ; Fritzache and Grimm, 
Kung^$tte$ Sxegetitehu Handbueh zu den Apokryphen dt* 
Alien Tettamenta (Leipzig', 1851-186n); BisseD, 'The A. of tibe 
OT" (Lang:e-Schair, Com. toL xv. ISSO); 'The ApociyiAa,* 
edited by H. Wace {Speaker'* Com. ISSs). 

4. Gexeral: Art. on the A. in Herzog, RE 2 Aufl. (by 
Schnrer) ; Smith, DS^ (by Rvle) ; Wetzer und Welte, Ertegk. 
d. KathoL TheoL* (by Eaulen) ; Hamburger, RE [Jewish]. 

See also artkdeB Baix, SEPrcAeiST, C a50S, and literature there 

dted. Frank C. Porter. 

APOLLONIA ('AxoWcwto).— ApoUonia, in Ac 17*, 
a town through which St. Paul passed, after 
leaving AmphipoKs, on his way to Thessalonica. It 
was an inland Gneco- Macedonian town in the 
district of Mygdonia, distant from Amphipolis a 
day's journey '( Li V. xlv. 28) or about 30 miles, and 
from ThessjQonica about 38 miles. It lay not far 
from the Lake Bolbe, and the Via Egnatia passed 
through it. Little is kno^^'n of its history. Its 
name (so common as to be represented by 33 
entries in Pauly-Wiss. HE, three in Macecionia 
itself, while the 'most important was A. in lUyria) 
seems preserved in the modem Pollina (Leake, 
N.G. iii. 458). William P. Dicksox. 

APOLLONIUS ('AxoXXt&i'toj). — Apollonius, a 
I)ersonal name of frequent occurrence (under which 
129 entries appear in Pauly-Wiss. RE), is borne 
by several persons mentioned in 1 and 2 Mac. 

1. The first, in the apparent order of time, is 
described (2 Mac 3*) as son of Thrasaeus (or 




Thraseas ; — the RV notes the text as probabl)' 
corrupt, and siij^'^'ests, as perhajjs the true reading, 
'Apollonius of TarBUs'), and governor (ffT;)aTi770s) of 
CiL'le-Syria and Plio-nice under Seleucus IV. 
Philopator (B.C. 187-175). One Simon, designated 
as governor (UV guardian) of the temple (2 Mac 
3^ vpoffTdrrji), having had dill'erences with tlie liigh- 
priest Onias concerning ' market-administration ' 
(iyopavo/j.ias seems preferable to the common 
reatling irapavo/xla^), took his revenge by suggest- 
ing to Apollonius that the temple at Jems, con- 
tained untold treasures, which might tempt the 
king's cu])idity. A. conveyed the suggestion to 
Seleucus, and induced him to send Heliodorus his 
chancellor (UV ; not 'treasurer,' AV), to Jerus. 
to plunder the temple. The devices of Heliodorus, 
the consternation occasioned by liis purpose, and 
the api)arition by which it was baflied, are narrated 
in 2 Mac 3. In 4 Mac 4''" the attempt is presented 
as the act of A. himself, and not of Heliodorus. 

2. At 2 Mac 4*' an A., son of Menestheus, 
appears, sent by Antioclius Epiphanes as envoy 
to Egypt on occasion of the 'enthroning' (which 
seems the best interinetation of TrpuTOKXiaia or 
irpwT0K\7)(Tta, literally the iirst 'sitting on,' or 
formal 'call to' the throne) of Ptolemy Philometor 
(in B.C. 173). He may not improbably be the 
same A. who is mentioned by Livy (xlii. 6) as having 
headed an embassy sent by Antiochus to Rome. 

3. At 2 Mac 6*^"=* we lind an A. sent by 
Antiochus Epiphanes (in B.C. 166), with an army of 
22,000 men, to Judaea, under orders to slay all that 
were of a^e for military service, and to sell the 
women and children. Coming to Jerus. under pre- 
text of peace, he took advantage of the Sabbath, 
w hen the Jews were keeping their day of rest, to 
massacre ' great multitudes.' He is characterised 
as 'that detestable ringleader' (RV 'lord of 
pollutions ' ; /jLvffdpxVj not occurring elsewhere, 
pos.sibly ' ruler of the Mysians,' but probably 
' leader in foul deeds '), m bile the use of the article 
seems to point to one previously mentioned, and so 
suggests his identity with the ' governor of Ccele- 
Syria' (in ch. 3' and 4*: No. 1 above). The 
interval of nine years leaves this at least doubtful ; 
but there is less reason to question his identity with 
the person not named but described at 1 Mac 1** 
as 'chief collector of tribute' sent by the HelleniMng 
king to carry out his policy of destruction. Jos. 
(Ant. XII. vii. 1) designates him as commandant 
(<rT/)aTij76j) of Samaria (apparently = provincial 
governor, ficpiSdpxv^< XII. v. 5), and records his sub- 
sequent faJl, in conliict with Judas Maccabajus, as 
does also 1 Mac S^"-'^. 

4. At 2 Mac 12'^ A., 'son of Genna^us,' appears 
as one of the local commandants who, notwith- 
standing the covenant that the Jews should have 
rest and leave to observe their own law^s, continued 
to vex them, and to countenance such attacks on 
their liberties as tlie treacherous massacre at Joppa, 
which Judas hastened to avenge. Nothing more 
is known of him. The patronymic 'son of 
Gennajus' distinguishes him from (1) the son of 
Thrasojus and (2) the son of Menestheus ; and 
the siiggestion of Winer (RWB s.v., following 
Liither's rendering Cfllcn), tliat Yewalov might l)e 
taken as an adjective, 'the well-bom,' used ironically 
(presumably of the latter), is highly improbable ; 
for, as Grimm remarks, the irony would be too 
covert, and (iennama occurs elsewhere as a proper 
name (Pape, s.v.). 

8. When Demetrius 11. Nikator came forward to 
claim his father's crown in rivalry to Alexander 
Balas (about B.C. 148), wo learn from 1 Mac. \{f-'^ 
that he appointed (Karidr-rtffev) A., who Avas over 
Ca!lc-S\Tia : who gathered a great force, challenged 
Jonathan the high priest as a supporter of Ralas, 
but, after a scries of successful manoeuvres on the 

part of Jonathan with the support of his brother 
Simon, was defeated in battle at Azotus (B.C. 147). 
From the mode of expression, he would seem to 
have been previously governor under Ualas, and 
won over by Demetrius ; which is the more prob- 
able, if he is to be identified with the A. mentioned 
by I'olybius (xxxi. 19. 6 and 21. 2) as the avvTpo<poi 
(foster-brother) and conlidant of the elder 
Demetrius, who shared in the plot for his escape 
from Rome, and may readily have sympathised 
with the claims of the j'ounger, when he came to 
assert them. Jos. (Ant. xill. iv. 3) calls him a 
Daian, i.e. one of the Dai or Daliai near the 
Caspian Sea, and speaks as though he fought 
agamst Jonathan in the interest of Ralas ; but this, 
as Grimm (in loc.) shows, is much less probable. 
The circumstance that the A. of Polybius had two* 
brothers, Meleager and Menestheus (xxxi. 21. 2), is 
a somewhat slender ground for assuming relation- 
ship to the son of Menestheus (No. 3 above). 

William P. Dickson. 

APOLLOPHANES ('AiroXXo^idvTjj, 2 Mac \Q^), a 
Syrian killed at the taking of Gazara bv Judas 
Maccab.'cus. This Gazara is not the well-known 
town in the Shephelah, near to Nicopolis and 
Ekron ; probably it should be identilied with 
Jazer on the farther side of Jordan, in the 
Ammonite country (so Rawlinson). See 1 Mac 6". 

H. A. White. 

APOLLOS ('AttoXXois). — An Alexandrian Jew 
(Ac 18-'). Apollonius, of which Apollos is a 
natural abbreviation, is the reading of Cod. D, 
the chief representative of the Western text of 
the Acts, which is here very interesting, and 
probably presents a genuine tradition. He is 
described as 'fervent in spirit' (see Ro 12''), as 
'an eloquent man' (for Xo7toj means this rather 
than ' learned '), and as ' mighty in the Scriptures,' 
i.e. well versed in the Gr. OT. He seems to 
have been connected with Alexandria by early 
residence as well as by race, for D records that 
his religious instruction was received iv ttj iraTpiSi. 
He came to Ephesiis in the summer of 54, while 
St. Paul was on his third missionary journey, and 
there ' he spake and taught accurately the things 
concerninj' Jesus, knowing only the baptism of 
John ; and he began to speak boldly in the syna- 
gogue.' The precise character of his religious 
knowledge is not easily determined from these 
few words. It has been generally held that A.'s 
instruction in 'the way of the Lord' (v.=", see 
Is 40^, Mt 3^) was such as any well-educated 
Jew might have gathered from teaching like that 
of the Baptist, based on the Messianic jirophecies. 
This view is conlirmed to some extent by the 
account of what happened when St. Paul returned 
to Ephesus after A.'s departure. He there found 
twelve disciples, who bemg asked, ' Did ye receive 
the Holy Ghost when ye believed?' returned an 
answer which sliowed their ignorance of any dis- 
tinctive gift of the Holy Spirit. They explained 
that they had formerly received John's baptism, 
but willindy accepted, the Christian rite at St. 
Paul's hands. It is probable that tliese men were 
disciples of A., and that, having been influenced by 
his teaching in the synagogues of Ephesus, their 
knowledge of Christian truth fairly represented his. 
But Blass (in /oc.) points out that the words naO-nral 
and TnarevaavTei used of them are never used save 
of Christians, and thus some knowledge at the 
least of the Christian story may be s\iiiposcd to 
have been theirs. Indeed A. is said (v."-^) to have 
taught AKpi^ws the things concerning Jesus, al- 
though he knew only of the baptltm of John. 
And so Blass suggests that, possibly from a 
written Gospel which had reached Alexandria, A. 
had learnt tlie main facts of the Lords life, and 
that his ignorance of Christian baptism may be 




explained by his not ha\-ing come in the way of 
Christian teachers. Takin<' this view, the narra- 
tive proceeds naturally : ' But when Priscilla and 
Aquila heard him, they took him unto them, and 
expounded unto him the way of God iKpt^ffrepw.' 
It would seem probable, though the fact is not 
stated, that A. received baptism at their hands, as 
his followers in a like case did at the hands of St. 
Paul. After some stay in Ephesus, A. determined 
to go to Corinth, an invitation to do so having 
come to him, according to the Western text, from 
certain Corinthians who were in Ephesus at the 
time. They gave him letters of commendation, 
and when he arrived in Corinth ' he helped them 
much which had believed through grace ; for he 
powerfully confuted the Jews and that publicly, 
showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was the 
Christ ' (Ac 18-«). 

In the spring of 57, A. having returned to 
Ephesus, we leam from 1 Co (see esp. V- and 3') 
that there were divisions among the Christians at 
Corinth, the names of Paul and A. (as well as of 
Peter) being used as those of party leaders.* The 
question at issue may have been only as to the 
relative importance of Paul and A. in the founding 
of the Corinthian Church ; but it seems likely that 
there was also a difference in the manner in which 
the gospel was presented by each. Possibly the 
eloquence of A. as contrasted with St. Paul's 
rugged style (see 1 Co 2^"'', 2 Co 11*) appealed to 
a certain cultivated class at Corinth, and it may 
be (though for this there is no proof) that some 
doctrinal differences appeared after the lapse of 
years. The teaching of A.'s followers may, e.g., 
have degenerated into Antinomian Gnosticism. 
However that may be, the Corinthian Church was 
agitated by bitterly opposed factions as late as the 
time of Clement of Rome. But it is unlikely that 
there was any personal disagreement between St. 
Paul and A. It has indeed been suggested that in 

1 Co 2S St. Paul has the eloquent A. in his mind, 
and again in 2 Co 3^, where he declares that he 
at least needed no commendatory letters ; and it 
is curious that A. is not mentioned at all as one of 
the founders of the Christian society at Corinth in 

2 Co V^. But however we explain these passages, 
they do not prove anj-thing like serious estrange- 
ment. In 1 Co 16^-, St. Paul, probably in answer 
to an invitation for A., says, 'As touching A., the 
brother, I besought him much to come unto you 
with the brethren, and it was not at all his will to 
come now [or ' not God's will that he should 
come now '] ; but he will come when he shall have 
opportunity.' A. may well have been un^\illing to 
return at a time when his presence would inflame 
party spirit. The last mention of A. in the NT is 
m Tit 3^^. He was then (a.d. 67) in Crete, or was 
shortly expected there ; and St. Paul urges Titus 
to set him forward on his journey with Zenas, — a 
kindly message which, while it does not suggest 
personal intimacy, does not suggest either any 
difference of interest or hostility of sentiment. 
Jerome {in loc.) thinks that A. retired to Crete 
until he heard that the divisions at Corinth were 
healed, and says that he then returned and became 
bishop of that city. 

It was first suggested by Luther, and the opinion 
is now widely held, that A. was the author of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews. See Hebrews. 

LrreKATTRE. — Conybeare and Howson, S*. Paul, voL iL ch. 
xiv. Jfeander, Planting, bk. iiL ch. vu. Renao, St. Paul, 
p. 240, 372 ff. Bias, Com. on Acts, pp. 201-3, and in Bxpot. 
iinet, viL 561 ; Wright, »6. uc 8. J. H. BERNARD. 


* Field, following Chrysostom, on 1 Co 4«, suggests ttiat the 
names of the real part}- 'leaders are not known to us, and tfaat 
St. Paul substituted for them his own name and that of ApoUoa. 
But, though his note is interesting, we prefer to follow the 
simpler and more usual interpretation in the text. 

APOLLTON ('AroXXvwr ' Destroyer ').— The tr. of 
the Heb. name fV=t3»e, the angel of the Abyss in Rev 
9**", who was king over the destructive locusts. 
In the Talm. tract Shabbath 55* we hnd reference 
to the angels of destruction (n^zn tk'js) who accom- 
plish God's purpose on the wicked. They are six in 
number : Wrath, Indignation, Anger, Destruction, 
Desolation, and Consumption. Over these are 
placed Abaddon and Maweth (ma Death). See 
Weber, System der Pal. Theol. p. 166 f. These 
are obviously later Judaic developments of the 
simpler ideas of OT ; for the tendency of Judaism 
after the Exile, and esp. during the Gr. period, 
was to interpolate personal mediating acti\ities 
between the supersensuous and the phenomenal 
world. But though this enormous development of 
angelology was stimulated by Hellenic speculative 
ideas, its ultimate source must be traced to Bab. 
religion (cf. SchwaUy, Das Leben naeh dem Tode, 
pp. 146 f.). Respecting the plague-demons of Bab. 
exorcism and personitications of evU, see Sayce, 
HibbeH Led. pp. 306-312 ; cf. also 327-335. 

Another name of like signification to that of A. 
is the Hellenic 'Affiwdaloi Asmodceus, a name which 
occurs in To 3^ as that of the evil spirit which slew 
the seven husbands of Sarah, daughter of Raguel. 
This is the Gnecised form of the Heb. iPf k, ' Des- 
troyer. ' The derivation of t his name must obviously 
be sought in the Heb. ~:xr 'to destroy.' The 
etymology which connects it with the Pers. ASshma 
daeva, leader of the devas, adopted by Levy in his 
Chaldee Lex. from Windischmann {Zoroastr. 
Studien), is by no means so probable. This personi- 
fication appears to be the same as 6 'OXoOpevaw of 
Wis 18». In the Targ. on Ec I'^ he is called ks'tc 
n'zn 'king of evil spirits.' It is not necessary 
to refer to the Jewish fables which represent 
Asmodaeus as the offspring of Tubalcain and his 
sister Xoema. Respecting Paul's use of iXotfpeimJs 
(n'TtfO of Ex 12'-''), introduced by him into the 
narrative of Nu 16^^^^, see Heinrici - Meyer on 
1 Co 10">. 

The OT conceptions respecting Abaddon may be 
gathered from a comparison of the passages Job 
26* 28** 31". In the first of these the word 
Abaddon stands in parallelism with Shedl or the 
underworld (Hades), just as we find in Pr 15". 
Delitzsch in his comment on this last passage 
endeavours to draw a distinction between Shedl 
and Abaddon, the latter designating the lowest 
depth of Hades ; but I see no warrant for thLs in 
OT, though in later times we know that such a 
distinction was made (Schwally, ibid. p. 166, on 
Lk 16^"-*, and Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, i. p. 169). 
Moreover, in Job 31** the same conception prevails 
in the mind of the writer as in the previous OT 

fassages to which we have referred. So also in 
's 88**,' where Abaddon and the grave stand in 
parallelism. On the other hand, it is worthy of 
notice that in Job 28*^ we find the beginnings of 
that personification which in later times was to 
have so extended a development. For in that 
passage both Abaddon and Death are personified, 
and words are ascribed to them. Cf. the vivid and 
dramatic portrayal of the devouring She jI in Is 
5". On the use of p-^jK in the Wisdom literature 
of OT see art. Abaddox. 

OwEX C. Wkitehouse. 
APOSTASY.— The Eng. word does not occur. 
The Gr. curorraffia is used twice : (1) in defining the 
charge made against St. Paul (Ac 2r-*') tliat he 
' taught all the Jews which are among the Gentiles 
to forsake Moses ' (so AV, RV ; Gr. dirotrTcwaw d-rb 
Mwiwewj, lit. 'a. from Moses*) ; and (2) sls the word 
used for the 'falling away' (so AV, RV) which 
precedes or accompanies the revelation of the 
' Man of Sin ' (2 Th 2»). See Comm. in lor. and 
art. Max of Six. J. Hastixgs. 




APOSTLE. — The proper meaning of driffToXoi is 
an ambassador, who not only carries a message 
like an dyyeXoi, but also represents the sender. So 
Herodotus (i. 21) of Alyattes to Miletus; (v. 38) 
of Miletus to Sparta. The influence of Athens 
diverted it for a time (e.g. Demosth. p. 252) to 
mean a naval squadron ; and in later law dirdaroXoi 
were the litterie dimissoria; by which a case was re- 
ferred to a higher court. In Uel. Greek it returns 
to its other meaning. This is not very distinct in 
1 K 14* (Ahijah dw. o-xXT/pis to Jeroboam's wife), the 
only place where it is found in LXX, though 
Symmachus has it clear in Is IS'' (that sendeth c-y^ 
by the sea). So there seem to have been dirdaroXoi 
sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple money, 
and dwdcToXoi sent by the foreign Jews to bring it 
to Jerus. Later on, the patriarch at Tiberias had 
dirixTToXot at his disposal (Epiph. Hcer. 30, p. 129; 
Cod. Theod. xviii. 8. 14, where Honorius, in 398, 
abolishes the whole system of taxation. See 
Gothofred, ad loc). 

In NT it is found Mt 10* {tuv Sk SuSeKa dw.), 
Mk 6*" (oi dir.— those sent forth, v."), Jn 13^^ (in the 
general sense), and frequently in Luke and Paul. 
Once (He 3') of oui- Lord Himself, which is the 
thought of Jn 17'*. 

After the ascension the number of the Lord's 
ajtostles was not fixed at twelve, except in the 
figurative language of Rev 21". Setting aside 
envoys of men (2 Co 8^^ dir. iKKXtjaiQv, Ph 2''* 
iifjiQiv Si dir.) and false ajwstles (2 Co IP*, Rev 2*) 
who needed to be tried (contrast iirelpaaas with 
1 Jn 4^ SoKifjidi'fTf), we have first Matthias, though 
it is best left an open (question whether he was 
penmnnently numbered with the Eleven. Of Paul 
and Barnabas there can be no doubt (e.g. Ac 14" 
oi dir. B. Kul II.), and of James the Lord's brother 
very little (Gal l'*, 1 Co 15^ and perhaps 9*). 
Anuronicus and Juniiis at Rome seem to be 
'notable' apostles (Ro 16'' itrla-qfioi in roh dir.), and 
possibly Silvanus also was an apostle. On the 
other hand, Timothy is shut out by the greetings 
of 2 Co, Col, Ph, and possibly 2 Ti 4" (evayY^- 
XiffTov), and Apollos (1 Co 4"-^ is indecisive) by 
Clement (Ep. 47), who most likely knew the fact of 
the case. 

The first qualification of the apostle was to have 
'seen the Lord' (Lk 24«, Ac 1«- =«, 1 Co 9'), for his 
first duty was to bear witness of the Lord's resur- 
rection (e.g. also Ac 2*-). Matthias, Paul, and 
James (1 Co 15'') had this qualification; probably 
Barnabas, Andronicus, and Junias, who were all 
of the earliest disciples ; and very possibly Silvanus 
also. On the other hand, it is unlikely of Apollos, 
hardly possible of Timothy, who were not apostles. 
We have no reason to suppose that this condition 
was ever waived, unless we throw forward the 
Teaching into the 2nd cent. The second qualifica- 
tion was (2 Co 12"') the ' signs of an apostle,' which 
consisted partly in all patience, partly in signs and 
wonders and powers, and jiartly again (e.g. 1 Co 9*) 
in eflective work among his own converts. 

These, however, wore only auaiifications which 
others also held. A direct call was also needed, 
for (1 Co 12** fOfTo 6 Bibs, Ei)h 4" oiVdj iSuKtv) no 
human authority could choose an apostle. In the 
case of Barnabas and Saul (Ac 13*) an outward 
commission from the Church was added ; and if 
Matthias remained an aj^stle, we must for once 
assume that the outward api)ointment somehow 
included the inward call of the Spirit. 

The work of the ajwstle was (1 Co 1") to preach, 
or (2 Co 5*, Epli 6*) to be an ambassador on be- 
half of Christ. He was (Lk 24**) to be a witness 
to all nations, and (Mt 28'*) to make disciples of 
them, so that the whole world was his mission 
field. There is no authentic trace (legends in 
Eus. HE iii. 1, and apocryphal works) of any local 

division of the world amongst the ai>ostles, though 
(Gal 2") it was settled at the Conference that the 
Three were to go to the Jews, Paul and Barnabas 
to the Gentiles. St. Paul's refusal (Ro 15^") to 
'build on another man's foundation' was due 
rather to courtesy and priidence than to any par- 
ticular assignment of districts to another apostle. 

It follows that the apostle belonged to the 
Church in general, and had no local ties. He had 
a right indeed (1 Co 9*''*' ") to eat and drink and 
live oil' the gospel, and to lead al)out a Christian 
woman as a wife ; but this was all. His life was 
spent in journeyings, in labours, and distresses 
(2 Co 6^), standing in the front of danger like 
(1 Co 4*) some doomed bestiarius of the amphi- 
theatre. Certain dwelling-place he had none. 
The Teaching goes so far as to declare him a false 

frophet if he stays a third day in one place. St. 
*aul worked for months together from Corinth and 
Ephesus ; but they were only centres for his work, 
no settled home for him. Only the unique posi- 
tion of Jerus. seemed to call for a stationary 
apostle in James the Lord's brother, who, more- 
over, was not one of the Twelve. John and Philip, 
and possibly Andrew, only settled down in Asia in 
their old age. 

The apostle's relation to the Churches he founded 
was naturally indefinite. He would (Ac 14=^) 
choose their first local officials, start them in the 
right way, and generally help them with fatherly 
counsel (1 Co 4'''' ^*) when he saw occasion. There 
is no sign that he took any share in their ordinary 
administration. St. Paul interferes with it only 
in cases where the Churches have gone seriously 
wrong. All that he seems to aim at is ( I ) to up- 
hold the authority committed to him ; (2) to check 
teachings which made the gospel vain, like tlie 
duty of circumcision, the denial of the resurrec- 
tion, or the need of asceticism ; (3) to stop cor- 
porate misconduct which the Churches themselves 
would not stop, as when the Corinthians saw no 
great harm in fornication, or turned the Lord's 
Supper into a scene of disorder. Questions referred 
to him he answers as far as possible on general 
principles, giving (1 Co 7) a command of the Lord 
when he can, and in default of it an opinion of his 
own, and sometimes a hint that they need not 
have asked him. In general, the apostle is not a 
regular ruler in the same sense as a modern bishop, 
but an occasional referee like the visitor of a college, 
who acts only in case of special need. 

Literature.— liightfoot, Gal., Excursus on The Name and 
Ofice of an Apogtlc ; Harnack, Texte u. (Inters, ii. 1, pp. OS-US ; 
Weizsiicker, Apnst. Zeitalter^ 584-690 ; Haupt, Xum VerstdiuL' 
nus d. Aposlolats im N.T., 1890. H. M. GWATKIN. 

APOTHECARY is found Ex 302«- » 37«', 2 Ch 16'*, 
Neh 3*, Ec 10', and in every case RV gives per- 
fumer instead. For the ref. is not to the selling of 
drugs, but to the making of perfumes (npn spice, 
perfume ; npi to mix spice or manufacture j)erfume; 
rpT a perfumer). But in Sir 38' 49' (fivpty/zbi) RV 
retains a., though from 49' it is evident that the 
perfumer is meant. J. Hastings. 

APPAIM (d:5X 'the nostrils').— Son of Nadab, a 
man of Judah (1 Ch 2»'-'"). See Genealogy. 

APPAREL. — In early Eng. a. is used of house- 
hold furniture, the rigging of a ship, and the like, 
but in AV it is confined to clothing. Althoiigh 
the word is now practically obsol., RV (following 
older VSS) has introduced it some ten times. In 
1 S 1738- «■•* a. replaces 'armour' of AV, very 
properly, for the reference is to Saul's military 
dress, not his armour. 1 P 3* RV ' the incorrupt- 
ible a. of a meek and nuiet spirit' is the only in- 
stance of a fig. use of the word in the Bible. (Cf. 




Ph 2*, Tindale's tr., 'and was foand in his a. as a 
man,' AV and RV 'fashion'). Apparelled occurs 
2 S 13", Lk T^; to which RV adds Ps 93^"" 
(both fig.). See Dress, J. Hastings. 

APPARENTLY, only Nu 12<>, and in the old 
sense of ' oj>enly,' ' evidently,' not as now, ' seem- 
ingly ' : ' W ith him will I speak mouth to mouth, 
even a. (RV 'manifestly ), and not in dark 
speeches.' Cf. Shaks. Com. Err. iv. i. 78 — 
* If he should scorn me so apparently '. 

J. Hastings. 
APPARITION.— This word does not occur in AV 
except in the Apocr., Wis 17' (Gr. lydaXfM, RV 
'spectral form'), 2 Mac 3^ (Gr., f-ri<pdv(ta, RV 
'apparition,' RV'm 'manifestation), and 5* (Gr. 
f-rupdveia, RV 'vision,' RVm 'manifestation'). 
The Revisers have introiduced a. at Mt 14-*, Mk 6^ 
as tr. of (pdm-affpux ( AV ' spirit '). J. HasTIXGS. 

APPEAL.— I. Ix THE Old Testament.- There 
is no provision made in the OT for appeal in the 
proper sense of the word, that is, for the recon- 
sideration by a higher court of a case already tried. 
The distinction made in the Law between the com- 
petence of higher and lower courts is of a different 
nature. A 'great matter' must be reserved for 
the supreme court, while the lower officers are 
competent to decide a small matter. This dis- 
tinction is found in one of the oldest parts of the 
Pent. (Ex 18-^-22 [E]), and in Dt 17^" [D]. And 
the allusion to the delays in legal proceedings of 
which Absalom took advantage, 2 S 15', also 
points to the antiquity of what is, after all, an 
obvious de\'ice inevitable in a growing nation. 
The supreme court for the hardest cases was either 
the king or the priest or the prophet, as the mouth- 
piece of J" Himself. The law of Dt 19'^'* is 
more like real appeal, for there a 'controversy' 
and ' false witness seem to be presupposed be/ore 
' the judges make diligent inquisition ' ; but prob- 
ably the first proceedings were rather admini- 
strative than judicial, and it hardly amounts to a 
second hearing of the case on appeal. According 
to 2 Ch 19^^ Jehoshaphat placed Zebadiah over 
the judges whom he appointed city by city through- 
out Judah ; but it does not follow that ^e was to 
hear appeals from the local courts. 

For the appellate jurisdiction of later times, see 

II. Ix the New Testament. — Ac 25, 26, and 
28^*. St. Paul was liable to be tried either by (1) a 
Jewish, or by (2) a Roman court. (1) The Roman 
government at this period allowed the authorities of 
each synagogue to exercise discipline over Jews, 
only they were not allowed to put any one to 
death, "the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem appears to 
have had more moral weight and a wider juris- 
diction (Ac 9^ 26^), but not larger legal powers 
(Jn 18=") ; and the incidents of Ac 7^ 22* 26i<» are 
to be regarded as in the eye of the law cases of 
lynching, at which the Roman government con- 
nived. A Roman citizen was entitled to claim 
exemption from the jurisdiction of the synagogue, 
but nevertheless St. Paul submitted to it five times 
(2 Co 11^, Ac 28'*). 

(2) He was also liable to be brought before the 
Roman governor in charge of the province or dis- 
trict (Ac 18>2etc.). 

When, then, Festus asked him whether he was 
willing to go up to Jerusalem and there be judged 
* before me ' (Ac 25*), it is not clear whether the 
proposal was that he should be tried (1) by the 
Sanhedrin in the presence of Festus, or (2) more 
probably by Festus himself at Jerusalem rather 
than Caesarea, on the pretext that the charge could 
be better sifted there ; but if so, why is the 
prisoner's consent necessary (Ac 25^-*)? In the 

one case St. Paul ' appeals' from the Jewish tribunal 
to the Roman, in%'oking Caesar himself as supreme 
magistrate, because Festus was about to surrender 
him to the Jewish authorities (see Ac 25"). In 
the other case he ' appeals ' from Festus the delegate 
(procurator) to the legal governor of the province, 
viz. Caesar himself. It is further not clear whether 
the alternative in Ac 25"-^ was that St. Paul 
should be released at once (Ac 26^ 28"), or that 
he should be compelled, in spite of his 'appeal,' 
to stand his trial at Jerusalem. This last is not 
impossible, for we learn from other sources {e.g. 
Suetonius, Galba 9) that at this time even a 
Roman citizen could not insist on being sent on to 
the supreme court from that of a provincial governor, 
who had the power of life and death (jus gladii) ; 
but only it was at his peril that the governor 
refused such an appeal. It was not uncommon for 
the governor in such a case to write to the emperor 
for instructions. The appeal in St. Paul's case 
has no connexion with either the provocatio ad 
popuium, or the appeal to the tribunes of the plebs, 
as they existed under the Roman Republic. (See 
Mommsen, JBdmiscAes Staatsrech^, IL 258, 931.) 

W. O. Burrows. 
APPEASE. — To a. in its mod. use is to pro- 
pitiate an angry person. In this sense is Gn 32* 
' I will a. hun >rith the present ' ; 1 Mac 13*^ 
' Simon was a^ toward them ' (RV ' reconciled unto 
them ') ; and Is 57* RV ' shall I be a"* for these 
things?' Everywhere else in AV a. has the ohs. 
meaning of to quieten (which is the orig. meaning, 
adpacem, to ' hria^ to peace '), as Ac 19** ' when the 
town-clerk had a" (RV 'quieted') the people'; 
Pr 15'^ ' But he that Ls slow to anger a**" stnfe ' ; 
Est 2^ ' when the \*Tath of king Ahasuerus was a* ' 
(RV 'pacified'); Sir 42^ 'he a"» the deep' (RV 
' hath stilled ') ; 2 Mac 4" ' Then came the Icing in 
all haste to a. matters' (RV 'settle matters'). 

APPERTAIN.- To 'a. to' is (1) to belong to, of 
actual possession : Nu 16** ' all the men that 
a"* unto Korah' (rnp^ n^* c-jxrr'^r) ; Lv 6* 'give it 
unto him to whom it a*"* ' ; Neh 2* ' the palace 
which a*'* to the house.' (2) To belong to, of right 
or privilege : To 6^ ' the right of inheritance doth 
rather a. to thee than to any other ' ; 2 Ch 26^ 
'It a*"* not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense' 
(1611 ed. 'pertaineth not,' so RV, Heb. i>-»e?) ; Bar 
2* 'To the Lord our God a*"* righteousness' (RV 
'belongeth') ; 1 Es 8»^, 1 Mac 1#*- «, 2 Mac 15». 
(3) To be appropriate : Jer 10^ ' Who would not 
fear thee, O King of nations? for to thee doth 

j it a.' {:^i ^); 1 Es 1^ ' they roasted the Passover 
vnth fire, as a**** ' (so RV ; Gr. «Iw KaO^Kei, as is 

I fitting. Cf . Lv 5^* c=ifs; ' according to the ordin- 
ance '). See Pertaix, Purtex.4XCE. 

J. Hastings. 
APPHIA.— A Christian lady of Colossa?, a 
member of the household of Philemon, very 
probably his wife. Her memory is honoured in 
the Greek Church on Nov. 22, as having been 
stoned to death at Colossae with Philemon, 
Archippus, and Onesimus in the reign of Nero ; 
but the authority for this fact is ankno\i'n. The 
name is Phrygian, being frequent in Phrygian 
Inscriptions under the varying forms 'Artpia, 'A(f>^>ia, 
'Artpias. In Philem. (v.*) the best attested reading 
is 'AT<(>uf ; but 'Aip^Ktf, 'Afuf^q., 'Arrigi are also found, 
and the Latin VSS vary between Apphiae, Apphiadi, 
Appiae. In the latter case it was probably assimi- 
lated to the Latin Appia (Lightfoot, C'oloss. p. 372; 
Men«on, November, pp. 143-147). W. LOCK. 

APPHUS ('Ax0ow, 'Za(fxl>o6s A, Zax^oi^ K Y.Appkus 

(Vulg.), .rro g> > . (Syr.), 1 Mac 2* ^A<fnpmn (Jos. 
Ant. xn. vL 1)), the surname of Jonathan the Mac- 




cabee. The name is usually thouj^ht to mean 
'Dissembler' (fc^sn) ; and eome suppose that it was 
given to Jonathan for his stratajjcm against the 
tribe of the Janibri, who had killed his brother 
John (1 Mac {F'*'). H. A. White. 

APPIUS, MARKET OF {'Airwlov 4>6poy, AV Appii 
Forum, Ac 28"), was one of the two points on St. 
Paul's journey to Rome at which he was met by 
Christian brethren from the capital. It was 
situated 43 miles from Rome, on the great Appian 
military highway, which formed the main route 
for intercourse with (Greece and the East. As 
a station where travellers halted and changed 
horses, it naturally became a seat of traffic 
and local jurisdiction. It was, moreover, the 
northern terminus of a canal {fossa) which was 
carried alongside of the road, and was used, as we 
learn from Strabo (v. 233), for the conveyance, 
chiefly by night, of passenjjers in boats towed by 
mules. Horace has (Sat. i. 5) preserved a vivid 
picture of the place, with its boatmen, innkeepers, 
and wayfarers, cheating, carousing, and quarrelling, 
amidst an accompanying plague of gnats and frogs 
from the Pomptine marshes. 

William P. Dickson. 

APPLB (n^sri tappuah). — The conditions to be 
fulfilled by the tappuah are that it should be a fine 
tree, suitable to sit under (Ca 2^) : 'As the apple 
tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved 
among the sons. I sat down under his shadow 
with great delight.' It should be of size sufficient 
to overshadow a booth or house (Ca 8') : 'I raised 
thee up under the apple tree ; there thy mother 
brou<jht thee forth ; there she brought thee forth 
that Dare thee.' It had a sweet fruit (Ca 2^) : ' and 
his fruit was sweet to my taste.' It also had a 

fdeasant smell (Ca 7^) : * and the smell of thy nose 
ike apples.' It was used to revive a person 
who was languid (Ca 2') : ' Stay me with 
raisins, comfort me with apples; for I am sick 
of love.' 

The apple fulfils all the conditions perfectly. 
It is a fruit tree which often attains a large size, 
is planted in orchards and near houses, and is a 
special favourite of the people of Palestine and 
Syria. It is true that the fruit of the Syrian 
apple is far inferior to that of Europe, and especi- 
ally to that of America. Nevertheless it is a 
favourite with all the people, and in a few places fine 
varieties have been introduced and thriven well. 
Doubtless such an epicure as Solomon would have 
had many of the choicest kinds. Almost all the 
apples or Syria and Palestine are sweet. To 
European and American palates they seem insipid. 
But they have the delicious aroma of the better 
kinds, and it is for this quality that they are most 
prized. It is very common, when visiting a friend, 
to have an apple iianded to you, just to smell. Sick 
people almost invariably ask the doctor if they 
may have an apple ; ana if he objects, they urge 
their case with the plea that they only want it to 
smell. If a person feels faint or sea-sick, he likes 
nothing better than to get an apple to smell. It 
is an everyday sight to see an apple put over the 
mouth of the small earthenware water pitcher 
(called in Arabic abrtg) to give a slight aroma of 
apple to the water. The nrst thing with which 
the capricious appetite of a convalescent child is 
tempted is an apple, which he fondles and squeezes 
with his fingers to develop the aroma, but perhaps 
never so much as bites. A very favourite preserve 
is also made of the apple. 

It will be seen by these facts that the apple 
fulfils all the conditions of the tappuah. Add to 
this that the Arabic name ti^dh is identical, and 
noway ambiguous as to its signification, and the 
evidence is complete. There is no other fruit 

which at all realises all these conditions. Tlie 
quince has a sour, acerb taste, never siveet. The 
citron ^ya^ probably introduced later than OT 
times ; it has a fruit with a thick rind, eatable 
only after a very elaborate process of preserving 
witn sugar. The pulp is never eaten in any form. 
The orange is a fruit introduced from the Spanish 
Peninsula during the Middle Ages. Its name, 
hurdekdn, is a corruption of the Arabic name for 
Portugal, bartxighal. It was probably not known 
to the Hebrews. The apricot is not a fruit with 
any special fragrance, and is never used as the 
apple to refresh the sick. A further confirmation 

01 the identity of tappuah with tijfi^h, the Arabic 
for apple, is the present name Teffdh for Beth- 
tappuah (Jos 15*^). 

The 'pictures of silver' (Pr 25") in which apples 
of gold are said to be placed, may have been filigree 
silver baskets for fruit. The Oriental silversmiths 
excel in the manufacture of such ware. 

G. E. Post. 

APPLE OF THE EYE (lit. ' child [fw-x, dim. of 
B^'K man] of the eye ' ; sometimes n? ' daughter of 
the eye.' Ps 17^, in combination, Pi;"fi3 pe^'K? 'as 
child, daughter of, the eye.' Once, Zee 2*, n^p ' the 
opening, door, of the eye ') is the ' eyeball,' or globe 
of the eye, especially the pupil or centre, the organ 
of vision ; composed of exceedingly delicate and 
sensitive structures, carefully shieldeil from external 
injury. It is enclosed in the bony orbit, supported 
behind and on the sides by a quantity of loose fat, 
protected above by the eyebrows, and in front by 
the eyelashes and eyelids, the lids closing instinc- 
tively in presence or danger. The surface is kept 
continually moist by an almost imperceptible flow 
of tears. Hence its preciousness makes it a fitting 
emblem of God's unceasing and tender care for His 
people, as in Dt 32^", Ps 17», Zee 2^ In Pr 1^ the 
same figure represents the preciousness of the 
divine law ; and in La 2^^ continuous weeping is 
enjoined because of the terrible calamities that 
had befallen the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 


APPOINT. — In earlier Eng. this word had a con- 
siderable range of meaning, and there are many 
examples in AV of obsol. or archaic uses. To a. is 
literally ' to bring to a point,' i.e. fix or settle. 

1. If the point in question is between two or more 
persons, tiien it means to agree, as Jg 20*^ ' Now 
there was an a'^'' sign between the men of Israel 
and the liers in wait.' Cf. Job 2" 'Job's three 
friends . . . had made an appointment together to 
come to mourn with liim and to comfort him.' 

2. If it is one's own mind that is to be brought to 
a point or settled, then a. means to resolve, as 

2 S 17" 'The Lord had a"' (RV 'ordained') to 
defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel.' 3. If it 
is other persons or things, then a. means (a) to 
make firm, establish, as Pr 8-"^ ' He a*'' (RV ' marked 
out') the foundations of the earth.' (b) To pre- 
scribe or decree, as Gn 30''^ ' A. me thy wages, and 
I will give it' ; 2 S 15^' ' Thy servants are ready to 
do whatsoever my lord the king shall a.' (RV 
' choose ') ; 2 Es S'' ' thou a«^* death in (RV ' for') 
him'; Is W^ RV 'every stroke of the a*'* staff' 
(Heb. mp'D n-^J} ' staff of foundation,' AV 'grounded,' 
RVm 'of doom') ; 1 Co 4» 'a«» (RV 'doomed') to 
death ' ; 1 Th S* ' God hath not a~» us to wrath.' 
(c) To set apart, as Job 7* ' wearisome nights are 
a«^ to me'; Ac 1*» 'they a«^ (RV 'put forward') 
two, Joseph . . . and Matthias.' Hence {d) to 
assign to some purpose or position, as Lk 10* ' the 
Lord a"'^ other seventy also.' In this sense a. is 
used with ' out ' in Gn 24** ' the woman whom the 
Lord hath a*'* out (RV ' a"^ ') for my master's son ' ; 
Jos 20* ' A. out for you (RV ' assign you ') cities of 
refuge.' Last of all (e) in Jg 18"- *^ a. means to 
furnish or equip : ' six hundred men a*^ (RV ' girt ') 




Avith weapons of war.' With which cf. Shaks. Tit. 
And. IV. li. 16— 

■ You may be armed and appointed well ' ; 

and Tindale's tr. of Lk 17* * Apoynt thy selfe and 
serve me.' J. Hastings. 

APPREHEND is twice used in AV in the 
still customary sense of ' making prisoner,' Ac 12*, 
2 Co IP-; but RV turns a. into 'take' in both 
passages, in order to make the tr. of the verb 
(Tidtio) uniform. See Jn T**- »»• « 8^ 1(P U^ 
21»- 1*, Ac 3^ Rev 19*. In Ph S^*- ^^ a. is found 
in the nearly obsol. sense of ' laying hold of,' and 
is used hg. , ' If that I may a. that for which 
also I am a*^ of (RV 'was a*^ by') Christ Jesus' 
(Amer. RV 'laid hold on'). To those, the only 
examples of a. in AV, RV adds Jn P 'And the 
light shineth in the darkness, and the darkness a*** 
it not' (AV 'comprehended,' RVm 'overcame,' 
with a ref. to Jn 12** ' that darkness overtake you 
not,' where the Gr. verb /caraXa/x^dvw is the same) ; 
and Eph. 3^* 'that ye . . . may be strong to a.' 
(same Gr., AV 'may be able to comprehend'), 'a 
minute and over-careful change,' says Moule. See 


APPROVE. — This word has now settled down 
into the meaning of ' to think well of ' ; examples 
are Ps 49^', La 3^. But in other passages we 
see it only approaching this meaning, and that 
from two sides. We may a. of a thing if its worth 
is tested by us, or if it is demonstrated to us. 
Hence (1) to test, or a. after testing (Gr. doKtfjuij^u 
or SoKifwi) : Ro 16^* ' Salute ApeUes, a"^ in Christ,' 
2^* and Ph l^^ ' thou a**' the things that are excel- 
lent' (RVm 'provest the things that differ'), Ro 
141s, 1 Co 1113 16», 2 Co 1018 137^ 2 Ti 2« and in RV 
Ro 14-, 1 Th 2*, Ja 1'=^.* And (2) to demonstrate, 
or a. after demonstration : Ac 2— ' a man a** of God 
among you (RV ' unto you ') by miracles ' (dTodtSeiy- 
tjiivov ets y/ias, 'a strong word = clearly shown, 
pointed out specially or apart from others ; it ex- 
presses clearness, and suggests certainty.^ — Page 
and Walpole, Acts, p. 18) ; 2 Co 6^ 'in all things 
a"^ ourselves as the ministers of God' (ffvyUmifu, 
RV 'commending'); 7" 'Ye have a*^ yourselves 
to be clear in this matter ' {avyi<n~nfu, RV as AV). 
Cf. Pref. to AV (1611) 'We do seek to a. ourselves 
to every one's conscience.' J. Hastings. 

APRON (■Tjijn, Gn .3' ; aifUKiydiov {semicinctium), 
Ac 19^-). — The OT instance is sufficiently explained 
by the context. That of Ac 19^ was a ^^Tapper of 
coloured cotton, in shape and size resemblmg a 
bath-towel, worn by fishermen, potters, water- 
carriers, sawyers, etc., as a loin-cloth ; worn also 
by grocers, bakers, carpenters, and craftsmen 
generally, as a protection to their clothes from 
dust and stains, and as something to \>,-ipe their 
perspiring and soiled hands upon. St. Paul would 
wear an a. when making tent-cloth. The labori- 
ousness of his life at Ephesus for the support of 
himself and others is referred to in the farewell 
words at MUetus (Ac 20**). Handkerchiefs and 
aprons were chosen (Ac 19^) because they Mere 
light and portable, and of the same shape for all. 
The incident referred to is in intimate agreement 
with Oriental feeling. Superstition carries it to 

* Craik (English of Shakespeare, p. 147) points out that a, in 
the sense of prove or test is very fr«iuent in Shaks. He quotes 
Two Getit. of Verona, v. iv. 43 — 

' O, 'tis the curse of love, and still approved. 
When women cannot love where thej-'re beloved.' 

And he says: 'When Don Pedro in Mtiich Ado abotit yothing 
(n. i. 394)" describes Benedick as "of approved valour," the 
words cannot be understood as conveying any notion of what 
we now call approval or approbation ; the meaning is merely 
that he had proved his valour by his conduct.' 
VOL. I. — 9 

disgusting excesses, as when the foam is taken from 
the lips of one fallen insensible after the Moslem 
religious dance (zikr), or when torches are frantic- 
ally lit from the holy fire at Jeru.salem. But the 
underlying thought is that healing power being 
from above must prefer consecrated channels. 

G. M. Mackie. 

APT has lost its orig. meaning of ' fitted,' which 
has been taken up by the compound 'adapted.' 
This, however, is the meaning of apt in the Bible : 
2 K 24^^ ' all of them strong and a. for war ' ( rcrh^ "pi', ) 
1 Ch 7* ; ' a. to teach' (didaKTiKos), 1 Ti 3-, 2 Ti 2^\ 

J. Hastings. 

AQUILA ('AjtJXai, ' an eagle ').— The first mention 
which we have of Aquila in Scripture is in Ac 18-, 
where he is described as ' a certain Jew ... a man 
of Pontus by race.' It has been conjectured that 
St. Luke here fell into a mistake, and should rather 
have described A. as belonging to the Pontian gen* 
at Rome, a distinguished member of which bore 
the name of Pontius Aquila (see Cic. ad Fain. x. 
33 ; Suet. Jul. Cces. 78). But for this there is no 
warrant beyond the similarity of the names ; while, 
as further confirming A.'s connexion with Pontus, 
we know that the A. who in the 2nd cent, trans- 
lated the OT into Greek was a native of that 
countiy (compare also Ac 2^, 1 P 1^). Along with 
PriscUla or Prisca his wife (see Priscilla), A. 
had taken up his abode in Rome, but had to flee 
owing to a decree of Claudius, in A.D. 52, expelling 
the Jews (Suet. Claud. 'lo says, ' Judaeos impulsore 
Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit.' For 
the meaning to be attached to the passage, see 
Neander, Pjianzung, I. p. 332, note 2 ; Lightloot on 
Philippians, p. 16, note 1 ; Plumptre, Bibl. Studies, 

f). 419). That the decree, however, did not remain 
ong in force, is proved by the mention of a number 
of Jews in Rome shortly afterwards (Ac 28"), and 
by A.'s o\i-n return (Ro 16^). From Rome A. sought 
refuge in Corinth, where he received the apostle 
Paul on his second missionary journey. It ha.< 
been debated whether A. had embraced Christianity 
before meeting Paul, or whether he owed his con- 
version to the apostle. Against the former view 
it is urged, that if he had been a Christian at the 
time of Ac 18-, he would have been described by 
the common name of itadrfrip or disciple ; against 
the latter, that if Paul had brought him to the 
truth, the fact would hardly have remained un- 
recorded, and further, that community of occupa- 
tion rather than community of belief is specially 
mentioned as ha^'ing brought the two together. 
In the absence of fuller information it is impos- 
sible to decide the question with certainty ; but 
the ready welcome which A. evidently accorded to 
one whom the bulk of his fellow-countrymen viewed 
with such disfavour as Paul, inclines us to the 
belief that when he came to Corinth he had at 
least accepted the first principles of the Christian 
faith, though his progress and growth in it he 
doubtless owed to the apostle. If so, he and his 
wife may be ranked as amongst the earliest 
members of the Christian Church at Rome ; and it 
would be from them that Paul would learn those 
particulars regarding the state of that Church to 
which he afterwards refers in his Ep. (see Ro 1** 
2gi7-i9) After about eighteen months' intercourse 
in Corinth, A. and Priscilla accompanied Paul on 
his way to Syria, as far as Ephesus, where they 
remained behind to carry on the work, amon;,'st 
those coming under their influence being Apollos 
(Ac IS-"*-^). They were e\-idently still at Ephesus 
when 1 Co was written ; and their house had come 
to be regarded as the meeting- place of one of those 
• little groups of believers into wliich, without anj- 
: definite organisation, the Church was then diWded 
I (1 Co 16'9 : cf. Ro 163- i«). From Ephesus Aquila 
1 and Priscilla returned to Rome, partly perhaps on 




aooount of some great danger they had run on 
Paul's behalf, the warmth of the apostle's greeting 
proving, further, the general esteem in which they 
were held (Ro 16*). Eight years later we find 
them again at Ephesus (2 Ti 41"). Tiie frequency 
of these changes of abode has caused difticulty, 
but, apart from the fact that an itinerant life 
was strictly in accord with all that we know of 
the Jews of that day, what more natural than 
that A. and Priscilla should a^ain desire to 
revisit the city whence they had been driven, as 
soon as it was safe to do so, even supposing they 
were not specially sent by St. Paul to prepare 
for his own coming? (See Lightfoot, PAi7t/>pta7w;, 
p. 176; Sanday and Headlam, Eomans, p. xxvii 
and p. 418 ir.). 

After 2 Ti 4" A. is not again mentioned in 
Scripture, and the evidence of tradition regarding 
him is very scanty. G. Milligan. 

AQUILA'S YERSION.— See Greek Versions. 

AR (nv Dt 2», conip. "i-y ' city,' or 3Kto-nj; Nu 2128, 
Is 16*), on the south bank of the river Arnon, on 
the northern border of the Moabite territory, 
situated in a pleasant valley where two branches 
of the river muted (Nu 21'» 22^ ' the city of Moab ' = 
Ar of Moab). It is possibly the same as Kerioth 
(Am 2*, Jer 48'^-''*). It is also almost certainly 
referred to in Dt 2^ as ' the city that is bj' the 
river,' AV, or rather, *in the valley,' RV (Heb. 
^nz, LXX ipipay^). The ruins of Rabbah, though 
often identified with Ar, lie, not on the banks of 
the Arnon, but at least 10 miles farther S., and 
represent a later city built after the old Ar had 
been destroyed by an earthquake in B.C. 342. 

Literature. — Driver, Devi, p 86 (on 29) and p. 45 (on 238) ; 
Dillmann on Nu 21i* : Delitzsch on Is 151 ; Dietrich in Merx, 
Archiv, i. 320 ff. ; Tristram, Land of Moab, p. Ill ; and see 
further under Arnox, Kerioth, Rabbah. 

J. Macphkrson. 
ARA (j<"3{?).— A descendant of Asher (1 Ch 7^). 
See Genealogy. 

ARAB (3-;k 'ambush' (?)), Jos IS'^.— A city of 
Judah in the mountains near Dumah. Perhaps 
the ruin Er Bahiyah near D6meh. SWP vol. iii. 
sheet xxi. C. R. Conder. 

ARABAH (n^itfPi).— This word occurs only once 
in the AV (Jos 18") in the des